Mailbag 09/2000 - 12/2001
Date sent: Thu, 6 Dec 2001
From: Egyptmoon
Subject: Nooo, movie! That’s a baaad movie!
Nathan~
You know the worst part? That Beauties and the Beast flick will undoubtedly be released on DVD, complete with a commentary from the *heehee* writer of *snort* the script *helpless chortling* as well as the makeup artist and Night of the Creeps will STILL be unavailable to buy in any format. I knew I should’ve kept the rental copy when I had the chance. (Okay, so it was probably 10 years ago…but still!)
Oh! And I’ll bet your little boy would love that movie Tarantula, More giant spiders than you can shake a can of Raid at! There’s also the surprisingly entertaining “Arachnaphobia” but that’s probably a bit too scary. (I know the damned thing makes me feel itchy everytime I see it!)
Happy Holidays and thanks for the laughs,
Nicole
My wife can’t sit through Arachnophobia herself, so I doubt she’d let me show the children. (Few movies have as high a heeby-jeeby quotient as that one.)
Nathan
From: Fabien Moisset
Subject: night of the creeps review
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001
hello, my name is Fabien and I live in France.
I had a good laugh while reading your reading of the Fred Dekker Cult Classic Night of the Creeps. This is one of my favorites 80’s B-movies and I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one on earth who know Fred Dekker and appreciate the quality of his work.(I like Monster squad too).
You should see the look in the eyes of the people when, during a conversation about cinema, I tried to talk about Night of the creeps and others pop-culture jewels; : you know what i’m talking about!
Anyway, i’m waiting for one thing: the release of Fred Dekker Wonderful Movies on DVD!
Thank you.
Fabien Moisset
Glad you enjoyed it. You may also notice that I use the lack of availability of Night of the Creeps as a point of comparison in other reviews (eg. “Haven’t seen Night of the Creeps for sale for over a decade, but Invisible Strangler gets a DVD release?!”)
Thanks again,
Nathan
From: Todd Coleman
Subject: Masters of the Universe on DVD
Date sent: Wed, 24 Oct 2001
Nathan,
Hey, how are you? Big fan of your site, it’s really well done. That review of Nemesis made me laugh for a week straight!
Anyway check this out (I don’t know whether you’ve already seen this or not) http://dvd.ign.com/articles/307592p1.html. Apparently Masters of the Universe is coming out on DVD with a director’s commentary! Finally we can answer that question everyone has been asking; What was Gary Goddard thinking?
Just thought you would be interested in this one. Keep up the great work Nathan.
Todd
You just gotta wonder how much commentary time he’s going to spend whining about meanie internet critics.
From: Mcfly8586
Subject: Hilarious reviews
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001
Just wanted to say I busted a gut reading you Nail Gun Massacre review. Also had the chance to read a bunch of others but must say, you have much work to do young man! There are a ton more cheesy horror and comedy movies I’m waitin’ for you to do. So I hope to see more soon and just hope that this email address still exists.
Thanx
Yes indeed, this email address still exists, and I do have a lifetime’s work ahead of me, and the only way I can make it through is by the encouragement of those who enjoy it. (That, and frequent transfusions of a rare blood type.) Thanks.
Nathan
From: Egyptmoon
Subject: Zombie lake, tip jar and an incontinent Wombat
Date sent: Sat, 20 Oct 2001
Nathan~
Hi there,
I’m one of your six or seven fans. *grin* Actually, I’ll bet you’ve got more fans than you think! I was reading the review for Zombie Lake and it suddenly hit me that I should tell you how much I love your site. (It also hit me that Aquatic Nazi Zombies make me laugh far more than is probably healthy…)
Anyway, I’m moving to Florida in a few days and starting work at SeaWorld as well as going back to college to become a Botanist. I’ll be making quite a bit more $$$ than I make right now. (How screwed up is it that I’ll make more money hawking season passes at SeaWorld than I made at hospital where I’ve worked the past four years and where I’ve performed successful CPR????)
But I digress.
My point is that I intend to leave you a great big ‘ole tip in the virtual tip jar. I’ve also drooled over the t-shirts and I plan on snagging a few of those too. I really appreciate all the work that goes into your site. :)
Thanks for all the great reviews, all the laughs and for providing a forum for the Hieratic Head of Ezra Pound to share it’s wisdom with the world! ;)
Take care,
B. Nicole
All kidding aside, a letter like this can have me floating on clouds for days on end. Thanks very much, and continue to enjoy my self- inflicted pain.
Nathan
From: Brandi Weed
Subject: Children Shouldn’t Play With Dead Things
Date Sent: Sat, 20 Oct 2001
Tangentially connected with the film:
A techno-ish sounding band called Hilt did a song called “Get Out of the Grave, Alan” that sampled one of Val’s better lines to interesting effect.
Also, Alan Ormsby did a terrific monster makeup book for kids, Movie Monsters and Make-Up (I think that’s the title), that Scholastic put out in the early 70s. Brandi [still has her copy somewhere at the parental house]
Wow. In a sudden rush of memory, I realize that I, too, owned that book. In fact, it was one of the major formative influences on my warped psyche. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
Nathan
From: diamondback
Subject: Thanks for the review.
Date sent: Sun, 14 Oct, 2001
Hi Nathan,
Ah man, I gotta stop laughing …. you nailed the review of Carnage Road with more direct impact then that machete to my head! Your analogies were of the utmost entertaining perspective and I agree totally with your opinions and general observations.
The shoot was brutal; the weather was literally about 117 degrees and I had just arrived from New Jersey where it was a beautiful 64 degrees. We had to ad lib many scenes without any real idea of what would then be plugged in before that nor what was to be added-in later (basically many times just not being “directed” as to what the hell was going on) … the actor Mike was … well, forget about it … he couldn’t deliver more that one line at a time and screwed that up most of the time; so out of desperation Max decided that I would just have to deliver all my lines in a close up and then they would have Mike read his lines right off a card, one at a time, and intercut the exchange as if it were a the “scene” …. oh great, expect acting is reacting and I had nothing to alter/adjust my deliveries & projections to … nothing to set the context, agenda, real status and sub-text —and to basically just play off-of to set my tone and delivery and reactions, etc …..
…. and we all ended up arguing and fighting with Max over the whole thing …
Are you friends with Max?
But anyway, thanks for the review and actually, the kind words on my portrayal of “Robert”.
Did I look too old to be playing a student?
Do you even have any opportunities to recommend actors to other movie makers? …. you think you could possibly ever mention my name for acting consideration in any upcoming movies that you come across?
Again, thanks for one hell of a review.
Keep the faith,
Dean Paul
Hey, glad to see someone appreciate the review. (Max sure didn’t, although he was civil about it.) I’m not too close to Max, so we’re more of acquaintances than friends.
You looked about right for a student, age-wise (maybe the floppy “don’t-need-to-be-marketable-yet” haircut helped).
I haven’t yet had any occasion to recommend actors, but you might be able to find some leads at http://www.b-independent.com, especially on the message boards. The webmaster, Allen Richards, also runs a mailing list at b-film@yahoogroups.com that’s more geared to microbudget production. (Max is also a subscriber, FYI.)
Nathan
From: “Greywizard”
Subject: “Deadly Reactor”
Date Sent: Thu, 27 Sept 2001
I share your pain from you being inflicted by the curse known as David Heavener. Last year I suffered through “Outlaw Force“, and the pain…oooh, I remember the pain…
Though since every B movie website needs to review at least one movie by Albert Pyun and Andy Sidaris, the equally active David Heavener has to be given the same consideration… though also in the aspect of WARNING people!
At least we know our readers won’t have to suffer.
Greywizard
The Unknown Movies Page
And yet — and yet — how many truly comprehend the warning? How many are titillated by it, tempted to experience the forbidden themselves? How many, told there is a single forbidden tree in Eden, immediately say, “Really? Which one?”
At least David Heavener has never made a zombie movie. Such a cinematic abomination might rupture the very fabric of the spacetime continuum and suck so badly it would destroy all of creation.
Nathan
From: “Billy Franks”
Subject: Billy Franks
Date sent: Sat, 22 Sep 2001
Nathan,
Mick McCleery sent me the link to your review of his movie, Track 16. I was glad to read you enjoyed the soundtrack.
Enjoyed touring your site, too.
Hope all is well with you,
Billy
www.billyfranks.com
Thanks, Billy. Keep on rocking.
Nathan
Subject: Recent review!!
Date sent: Fri, 17 Aug 2001
From: “Jason Santo”
Hi Nathan!
Just wanted to thank-you very much for continuing to support Random Foo by reviewing our movies. That was a terrifically long one for The Quiet Day. It’s an odd movie, and I understand your confusion. In case you were wondering about the end, I spent the beginning of the movie trying to build up a mystery about why they weren’t watching TV or surfing the web, why there were no plows, why it was “just like any other day.” The movie is supposed to be an anti-war picture, about how easy it is to destroy what takes us so long to build. Unfortunately, it fails. It’s the most personal flick I’ve ever made, and I doubt I’ll try anything like it again.
Thanks again!
Jason
I’ll admit, I was confused. With the final revelation that the quote in the opening is from Winston Churchill, I thought that this was supposed to be a pseudo-period piece, set during, say, the Blitzkrieg (that surprise revelation being the twist at the end). But there were too many modern appliances — computers, remotes, etc. — to let that interpretation stand for more than a second or two.
The good news is that, as a wise man once said, there is no such thing as a failed experiment. every experiment tells us something, even if the answer is “Nope.”
Nathan
(the Enlightened)
Date sent: Sat, 11 Aug 2001
From: Matt McIrvin
Subject: Re: Cold Fusion Video Review: Strange Days
Just read your insightful review of Strange Days.
I never saw that movie, but I might note a couple of things about “squids” that have some bearing on points in the review:
1. There really are such things as SQUIDs (”superconducting quantum interference devices”). They can’t read people’s minds, but they are capable of detecting extremely weak magnetic fields and electric currents; with enough handwaving you could pretend that they could be used to read thoughts. So I suppose you could say that the technological seeds of such a thing does exist. But you’re basically right, since it’s still ridiculous to suppose that they could be made into consumer thought-o-scopes in a few years.
2. The idea that SQUIDs *could* be used to read thoughts was probably lifted from a specific source, namely the story “Johnny Mnemonic” by the notoriously technically illiterate William Gibson (when Hollywood belatedly caught on to the whole cyberpunk thing, this was made into a bad movie that you’d think would have convinced Keanu Reeves never to do another cyberpunky thriller about virtual reality). I don’t recall whether SQUIDs were specifically mentioned in the movie, but they played an important role in the original story; they were a technology that could be used to get the informational McGuffin out of Johnny’s brain.
Now, “Johnny Mnemonic” was set in a heavily networked, cyberspace-using future. In fact, in literary SF it was to a large extent (along with Neuromancer, which was a little later) *the* story that introduced people to such a future. So Cameron didn’t have that excuse.
I’m fascinated by the way that newish science-fictional ideas gradually seep out into mainstream pop culture. With the cyberpunk stuff it’s taken about twenty years and the realization of some of the predictions. In the eighties, stories that relied heavily on virtual reality, cyberspace, and a networked world tended to be mostly a literary-SF ghetto thing. There were vaguely proto-cyberpunk movies like Blade Runner and Tron, but they attracted only small cult followings; the more conventional WarGames was the closest hit, and that was basically a cold-war thriller with juvenile SF elements. The most explicitly cyberpunk thing to hit TV in that era was Max Headroom, which used ideas from print SF for satirical purposes, and it just confused people.
In the early to mid-nineties, there was a belated explosion of interest in this in Hollywood, just *before* the Web hit the public consciousness (but after a dawning of interest in “multimedia” PCs and dial-up on-line services). Most of the associated movies and TV shows bombed, though (Hackers, The Net, VR5, Johnny Mnemonic, etc.) Strange Days was a little behind that curve.
The *third* wave was sparked by The Matrix, and since society had caught up with these ideas to some extent, it finally took.
Matt
And of course, I meant to allude to every bit of that in my review, but… ah… then the toaster popped, and I lost my train of thought.
Max Headroom… Alas, we hardly knew ye…
Nathan
From: “Jason Day”
Subject: Re: Star Trek actors in halloween
Date sent: Sat, 04 Aug 2001
the mask worn by michael myers in halloween was a bill shatner mask painted white.
Yeah, I guess I shoulda thought to count that…
Nathan
Date sent: Wed, 1 Aug 2001
From: Brendan O’Brien
Subject: dawn of the dead
hey nathan, just read your review of dawn, and was pleasantly surprised to find someone else who isn’t afraid to classify it as uneven. there’s no doubt it’s a great film, but there’s some deadly boring stuff going on. and when the mob gathers the torches over your criticizing goblin, i’ll help you pull up the drawbridge to keep them out. besides dawn, their score to the other unassailable classic suspiria is almost unbearable for me. ya gotta call it like ya see it in this business.
brendan
From: DKats4195
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2001
Subject: I’m the “Star Crystal” composer… :)
God - you were so right!
The worst movie ever made - a student film, really. How it ever got released was a mystery. How low budget was it? I was not only the “composer” (4 days with a DX7 and an engineer in a garage) but I was a foley artist (smashing watermelons for footsteps) and the voice of the “creature” as well! I spent more going to LA to “score” the goofy thing than I got paid. I’m happy to report that I did indeed work in the interim, and I’m really a good musician - just look me up on the internet to find out who I am, really. As for the stupid mesmerizing drone music throughout the score, of course, I was following orders from the producer, and as I said, it was all done within a set of weekdays, not the usual month an actual film score requires.
We ALL hated the film, but of course, on my bio, it is called “the Science Fiction Classic!”
Ya gets it where ya can!
Thanks for the heartfelt review, and keep up the truth!
Doug Katsaros
From his wonderful note, you can’t even tell that the experience of working on Star Crystal left Doug completely insane.
Nathan
From: “Captain Haddock” <lebong11@hotmail.com>
Subject: Thanks for “The Man Who Wasn’t There” review
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2001
Nathan-
I just want to congratulate you on your coverage of the oft-ignored epic, The Man Who Wasn’t There. I’ve been obsessed with this movie since first seeing it about ten years ago on video. It seemed to have a joke every ten seconds or so and yet I never laughed. It was the most try-hard comedy I’d ever seen and yet completely bereft of laughs. I love this movie for its complete and utter failure of intent. OK, I guess I thought worse of it than you. But laugh or not (clearly, Not), I did become rather impressed in some way and have watched it at least once a year since discovering it. In fact, one time I ran into Jeffrey Tambor, after the success of “The Larry Sanders Show”, and I mentioned I knew him from this movie. He got the joke as I slagged the flick when mentioning it, but was sheepish in the fact that I recognized him from it. When I found out that the Coen Brothers’ new movie was the same title as our 3-D Steve Guttenberg classic, I realized no one in the filmmaking communitity even cared that the movie had even existed. I thank you for noticing, for perhaps the last time, this beautiful mess of celluloid.
Cheers,
Lucas
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2001
From: Rick
Subject: Man Who Wasn’t There review
Nathan,
Loved your review of The Man Who Wasn’t There. I was actually lucky (?) enough to see this thing in 3D when it first came out. I always thought it was strange making a 3D movie about an invisible man. Seems kinda counterproductive. Anyway, you’re right about the releatively low nimber of “oh, looky! We’re in 3D” moments, but again, that kind of begged the question; why make it in 3D to begin with. Ah, well, it still had one benefit. Lisa Langlois, etc. naked in 3D. :)
Keep up the good work.
–
Rick
From: “Gary and Sandra” <gharriee@intergate.ca>
Subject: Predator
Date sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2001
Hello Nathan.. Have you seen Predator II?. I preferred it to the original movie (it’s definitely not a chick flick, but I sat through it because I wanted to see whatever was the second feature) :. The Predator ( or rather, a different member of the same species - because the first one got his alien butt kicked by Ah-nold) goes on safari in Los Angeles, and starts picking off drug dealers.. This would not necessarily be a bad thing, except that he makes no distinction between the bad guys and the cops, and cheerfully kills them too.. He does have standards, however:. he spares two women ( a drug dealer’s bedmate and a lady cop), either because he doesn’t think its sporting to kill females, or because one of them is unarmed and the other is pregnant.. There are some humorous touches ( when we finally see the interior of the Predator’s ship, one of the trophies on display is the skull of the Alien!. Actually, there are a series of books based on ‘graphic novels’ - which is a high-falutin’ way of saying ‘comic books’ - called Alien Vs Predator.. It turns out the Predators actually bred the Aliens, in order to have something really challenging to hunt!. I wonder when Hollywood will get around to making the movie?. Probably it will be a double feature with Jason Vs Freddy Krueger.)
Well, you probably don’t want to hear my thoughts on Predator 2 then, since I thought it vastle inferior (Ahnuld taking on a Predator? Sure. Danny Glover? Umm…). I thought that the “getting to know the Predator” angle took away a whole lot of the fun, and the ensuing Dark Horse comics frenzy basically played out every variation possible.
But you’ll hear more about that when I get around to reviewing Predator 2, sometime in the unforeseeable future (i.e., not during this Video Binge…)
Nathan
Date sent: 14 Jul 2001
From: “Raven NightDragon”
Subject: Night of the Creeps Review
Just a note, something I remembered after reading your review. You might want to add the alien spaceship model from the begging of Night of the Creeps to the list of actors who have appeared on Star Trek, as it was reused in at least one episode of TNG. I know, not technically an actor, but still some interesting trivia. I could tell you what episode it was in exactly, but my TNG episode guide has vanished. Oh well. Enjoy the tidbit.
Hee hee hee!
From: “James Willett”
Subject: your review of the cars that ate paris
Date sent: Thu, 5 Jul 2001
You toatlly missed the point of this dark comedy. what did you need to see, soem special effecs or something. it’s an excellent movie. you are wrong.
Wow, that certainly proves it to me. Thank you for your scintillating observation and erudite explication of the deeper and more worthwhile aspects of this underappreciated classic. How wrong I have been.
Nathan
Date sent: Thu, 21 Jun 2001
From: Brandi Weed
Subject: Logan’s Run
If you read the book (and yes, there is one), this society seems to be a bizarre extension of the 60s youth culture and ‘don’t trust anyone over 30′… although in the book the age for Carousel is actually 21! I think the movie didn’t want to have teen sex to the extent that it probably was flourishing in there…
Brandi
I’ve actually just been reading a high-falutin’ paper on Logan’s Run (http://www.transparencynow.com/logtable.htm), and the author makes a point of showing how, while the novel was a poorly-disguised allegory for the counterculture vs. the VietNam establishment, the movie actually turns around and comes out against many of those counterculture hallmarks: Free love, infinite leisure, etc.
On the other hand, the essay never actually uses the word “silly” to describe the movie, so take everything with a grain of salt.
From: Jacquelyn Ruffner
Subject: THANKS!
Date sent: Mon, 11 Jun 2001
Nathan,
Thanks for reviewing The Third Society. No, I’m not mad…
Dunno what to say uh- yeah…uh-okay…ouch…oh well…do better next time…(although you’re probably hoping there isn’t a next time).
But anyway for whatever it is worth…thanks for your opinion. I do appreciate it. I thought the comments with the “Drop the gun” were funny.
Take care.
Jacque Ruffner
aka JA Steel
From: Brad Osborne
Subject: HALL OF MIRRORS review
Date sent: Thu, 7 Jun 2001
Nathan,
On behalf of the cast & crew of Hall of Mirrors, thank you for your insightful and entertaining review of the film. By far the most engaging, witty, and thoughtful appraisal we’ve had so far! It was a pleasure to read, and I’m gratified that you found the movie engaging (nothing’s a bigger rush for a filmmaker than to provoke a “lurching feeling in the pit of the stomach”).
You raised some interesting questions in your analysis. I am often asked whether the con artists had planned the entire deception from the beginning (meaning that Mara intended for Dylan to see the keychain, thereby providing him the means to find her later), or if they invented the con as they went along (meaning that Mara, upon being discovered by Dylan at her gallery, acted quickly to put a secondary plan in place). As a writer, it didn’t really matter to me how the audience interpreted it. What was important to suggest is that these folks probably take lots of people for ten grand with their fake counterfeiting scheme, but when they found just the right person, it was time to go for the bigger kill: getting him to steal $1.5 million, deliver it into their hands, then scare him so badly that he goes away and never speaks of it again. Esentially, a con with a series of safety nets to deal with unforseen circumstances. This is a ruthless bunch to be sure, but not a bloodthirsty gang of killers. The murder, of course, was simply Mara’s way of making sure things stuck to plan.
Not that you asked me for all this info, but sometimes I have re-trace it all myself to make sense of it!
I plan to include a link to your site in our next emailing. May we post your review on the HOM website and use copy for promotional purposes? (Verbatim, of course…Unlike Sony/Columbia, we don’t make stuff up).
And alas, I feel obliged to tell you that because of recent feedback I have dispensed with “the letter” for future mailings.
All The Best,
Brad Osborne
P.S. I thought maybe one breast would have made it into your Notable Totables. Watch the bedroom scene and the “stripper flashback” again for obligatory nipple peeks. Did I say that?
I missed a nipple? Impossible, I say!
From: “Brad Friedman”
Subject: Dead Boyz Review
Date sent: Mon, 21 May 2001
Hey Nathan -
I’m Brad Friedman, the actor who played GOOSE in one of your favorite all-time movies “Dead Boyz Don’t Fly” :-)
Writing to ask permission to Copy your review (with credit, of course and a link to your page) over on my own personal site.
Hope you are well, and have thoroughally been able to shake off the traumatic experience of viewing that thing! :-)
Brad
Certainly! And send me the URL to your page as well.
I’ve been toying with the idea of going back and doing a more complete review, but a) the one video store that I know has a copy has closed, and b) it is a bit of an experience to put myself through. Much easier to poke fun at machine-produced DTV crap, you know?
Nathan
Brad’s webpage, by the way, is at www.cville.com/members/Brad.
From: “Tony Nelson”
Date sent: Mon, 21 May 2001
Subject: Concerning your review of Robot Wars.
Hiya.
I just discovered Cold Fusion last night, and to say I was hooked to reading your reviews is an understatement. (I actually spent all night, off and on anyway, reading various reviews. Nice thing about being an insomniac is that you can do these things in your spare time! ;)
Anyway, the main reason I am writing is in response to your review of Robot Wars. Now, I’m a self-proclaimed Full Moon mark, (That’s carnival speak, son!) and seeing so many reviews of films made by Charlie Band’s company, among others, was quite nice. However, while I agree with you about your initial review, and that the film was lacking, especially in the post-production editing, I think there’s something you deserve to be made aware of. This applies to all Full Moon films prior to the split from Paramount, for that matter. I’m sure you know that there are pre-release screener versions of certain movies that happen to get into the hands of certain people, and Full Moon is no exception when it comes to releasing screeners. However, what you may not be aware of is the fact that Full Moon’s screeners are of the version(s) of their movies that are meant to be seen. Before the crappy editing jobs. One example I give you: In the screener version of “Arcade“, you’ll find that there’s a lengthier scene when the programmer of Arcade is explaining everything about the game, how it came to be, the levels of the game, and how to ultimately defeat it to Alex and Nick. I think you’ll find the version of Robot Wars before the butcher editing job a lot more enjoyable. You can find them mostly on eBay, which is where I got screeners of Bad Channels, Arcade, Seedpeople, Invisible: The Chronicles Of Benjamin Knight, Mandroid, and Trancers 4. I’ve been told by someone that does have the Robot Wars screener, (And before you ask, yes, I have offered an arm and a leg to buy it. No go. :( But I shall persist!) does in fact have all of the additional footage that you had observed as missing.
I hope this helps, and I hope you continue in your quest to review lesser known films which a small majority of us know and love.
–Tony Nelson
I certainly wish the “good” version of Robot Wars had been released; however, I somehow suspect that even the good version wouldn’t have been all that good. Somehow, live-action giant robot movies never seem to work as well as they should.
In related news, original MTV VJ Martha Quinn is joining the staff at the local all-’80’s radio station. I’m wondering whether I should call her on her first day and give her grief over Bad Channels.
Nathan
From: Aldogott
Date sent: Tue, 15 May 2001
Subject: Alien Agenda Review
Nathan Shumate!
LOLOL! .I loved your review of Alien Agenda, and I couldn’t stop laughing about the “parakeet girl” comments! .This is Gabriel Campisi — I directed the Fritz and The Law segment in Kevin’s anthology.
I just wanted to say hello and thank you for a fun review! .:)
Yeah, I must’ve been smoking some funny crap or something that week when I allowed that hair-do on the set. .But hey, that was one of my first films, shot on VHS of all things, with a budget of about $3.27. .Live and learn.
Thank you again! .And please keep up the great work on your website! .I’ll be reading! .:)
Cheers!
Gabriel
From: Jason Santo
Subject: Hey Nathan!
Date sent: Mon, 7 May 2001
Nathan,
Thank-you.. Just saw the review you did of Fade to Black #3 and I wanted to say thank-you for seeing through the bad production values, shaky camerawork and lousy acting what we were really trying to do: tell a story quickly.. Fade to Black #14 will be out later this month, so I just wanted you to know we haven’t given up yet and we’re still learning! Thanks for your support!.
Jason Santo
www.randomfoo.com
Always glad to point out the best of intentions when I see them — heaven knows, there are few enough of them out there. I’ve got another four installments of Fade to Black that I’m honestly going to get around to reviewing. Honest.
Nathan
Subject: re: Your Reviews Are Safe
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001
From: “Joseph”
Nathan,
I doubt anyone will care to steal one of your reviews, if your review on The Star Raiders is any indication of your typical style. I agree that this was a rather poor film, but I take exception to your hard-headed, narrow-minded lambasting of child actor, David Mendenhall, who was indeed a fine child actor.
You write:
his name is Peter, but I consistently thought of him as That Damned Kid, a twelve-year-old with shaggy brown hair. The actor is David Mendenhall, who spent much of the eighties doing the same “cute kid” schtick is such movies as They Still Call Me Bruce and Going Bananas; his main acting talents appear to be the ability to stare straight ahead with his big doe eyes, and occasionally, at the off-screen cue of the assistant director, to break forth into a big chipmunk-cheeked grin.
Now, you write this after making it clear that you have no time or affection for any kids other than your own, so your comments on this fine young actor are not surprising.
If this actor is seen on screen, staring ahead with his “big doe eyes”, or breaks forth into a smile, talk to the director about it, rather than pointing to this as an example of this young actor’s supposed limited talent. Mendenhall had years of experience taking direction from off-camera directors by the time this movie was filmed, and without giving any indication of their direction. His acting ability was considered the best of any youth actor two years in a row for his almost daily work on General Hospital, winning the Youth Actor Award in 1983 and 1984, and he won the same for other roles throughout the 80’s.
You didn’t like Mendenhall before you ever viewed this film. It seems obvious, in reading your slanted review of this film, specifically of Mendenhall’s work, that you watched this movie, only with the intent of panning the young actor.
For example, you write,
As you may imagine, his (Mendenhall’s) career petered out entirely toward the end of that decade, as whatever quality is was the people thought he had melted away.
So, in other words, this talentless brat, who began in films at age 6, who had a starring role for 7 years in the most popular serial on television at that time for which he received two actors’ awards, and who was cast in a variety of tv and movie roles, for which he also won best young actors awards, somehow, in your view is nullified, seeing that Mendenhall’s last two feature films in 1990 turned out to be his last, after a very successful 14 years as an actor, and you draw the “obvious” conclusion, as you “imagine” your readers might, that this is some indication of the actor’s lack of talent.
You write:
they look up to see the blank-faced little cretin. “Can you take me home now?” he asks. As you may have gathered by now, I wasn’t exactly sympathetic to That Damned Kid’s plight. After another ten minutes of the kid doing nothing but getting in the way (aw, gee, ain’t it cute?) …
A great script and an excellent director can never make a poor actor act well. But a poor script for a film with inadequate direction can hinder an excellent actor from putting on a good performance. As you obviously despise Mendenhall and whatever “cute-appeal” he had as a kid actor, or as a kid, for that matter, there’s no point in raising the subject of what I feel was a good role for Mendenhall, for example, in Stallone’s, Over The Top, which no doubt would have been another movie you would have been eager to pan before you saw it.
Nevertheless, the part of Hawk’s son in Over The Top was an emotional role which called for a kid actor with real talent. Posers don’t win awards, but sometimes, real talent, especially among kid actors, is doomed to fade into oblivion when they can no longer take a child’s part in a movie or tv show, and they are forced out of the business through lack of work, rather than lack of talent. Most kid actors do throw in the towel after realizing that the industry was only interested in them as a child actor, and had, despite years of devoted work, awards, or anything else, made no plans for them in adult roles which go to the established adult actors.
Enough said. Too bad the subject of this issue is conveniently “locked” at the Cold Fusion Website and cannot be added to, or I would have panned YOU but good on the board at the site.
Joseph
You know, sometimes I’m just astounded at the things people wave flags for. I’d run a betting pool as to whether our correspondent Joseph’s last name just happened to be “Mendenhall,” but I don’t know that anyone would take the bet. But hey — I can’t let such an attempt to give me a sincere chastising go unrefuted, can I?
Point by point, then:
I doubt anyone will care to steal one of your reviews, if your review on The Star Raiders is any indication of your typical style.
First up, the name of the movie under discussion here is Space Raiders. Not The Star Raiders. Coupled with his minimal references to the actual film to make his point and refute mine, it seems pretty obvious that Joseph has not seen Space Raiders, at least not in the past decade. And then he’s got the nerve to later scold me, groundlessly, for panning movies without seeing them? Sheesh.
Now, you write this after making it clear that you have no time or affection for any kids other than your own, so your comments on this fine young actor are not surprising.
Perhaps I should not have used such flowery language in the review, as it apparently confuses those with short attention spans and fiery agendas. My point: I feel no need to fawn over kids simply because they’re kids. Sure, I appreciate good child actors, when I see’em; The Sixth Sense and Sleepless in Seattle feature examples of this rare beast. But when a performance sucks green weenies, I’m not going to brush it all under the rug of “He’s just a cute kid” and call it fair. If a performance stinks, it stinks. I don’t grade on the curve; after all, it doesn’t cost any less to rent a video starring a child actor, so why should I expect less entertainment value?
His acting ability was considered the best of any youth actor two years in a row for his almost daily work on General Hospital, winning the Youth Actor Award in 1983 and 1984, and he won the same for other roles throughout the 80’s.
This almost becomes an incidence of an Informed AttributeTM Jabootu.com here in the real world. “He won awards for his work, so he must not have sucked in Space Raiders!” He was voted best child actor on TV for two years running — and? So? Does that make him actually good, or does it mean that there was a very small pool to choose from? I note that this was immediately before the advent of The Cosby Show, which reintroduced the family sitcom and consequently prompted whole bundles of cute urchins to be released on viewers by the networks; somehow, Mendenhall’s name fails to show up once he had significant competition. Also, by analogy, I note that Marisa Tomei won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in 1992 for her work in My Cousin Vinny. Does this automatically mean she’s one of the dozen best actresses of our generation, or does it maybe mean that 1992 was slim pickins for nominees? Think the analogy through.
You didn’t like Mendenhall before you ever viewed this film. It seems obvious, in reading your slanted review of this film, specifically of Mendenhall’s work, that you watched this movie, only with the intent of panning the young actor.
Curses! The David Mendenhall Jihad is foiled again, Ahmed! Come on, Joseph, lay the conspiracy theories to rest; I was not roaming the video stores, looking for a particular forgotten child actor against whom I held a grudge. I rented Space Raiders because I had seen the poster for it once before, and I simply could not ignore the lame performance of a lame character which was the movie’s centerpiece. I didn’t even realize that he was the kid in They Still Call Me Bruce or Going Bananas until checking out information in the IMDb while writing the review. It’s nothing personal against David; his performance just reeked, that’s all.
…somehow, in your view is nullified, seeing that Mendenhall’s last two feature films in 1990 turned out to be his last, after a very successful 14 years as an actor, and you draw the “obvious” conclusion, as you “imagine” your readers might, that this is some indication of the actor’s lack of talent.
No, of course not, Joseph. It’s just a coincidence that his career faded right when his gosh-darned kidsy cuteness did. Directors really were hiring him for his Welles-like intensity and DeNiro-like range, not for his gopher cheeks and anime-sized eyes. Just like the Olsen Twins were originally hired because someone saw the twin babes-in-arms and exclaimed, “My God! What sheer, raw acting talent!”
A great script and an excellent director can never make a poor actor act well. But a poor script for a film with inadequate direction can hinder an excellent actor from putting on a good performance.
Your visible desperation to defend Mendenhall is clouding your reading comprehension. At this point, I was clearly criticizing those very elements which you want to use as your scapegoats: The directing and script. Am I also to be castigated for pointing out that the story gave the character nothing useful to do? Shall you not be satisfied until I relent and admit that Space Raiders is nothing but unmitigated genius in all aspects, and that I am simply jealous of the utter, Platonic perfection that is Space Raiders?
As you obviously despise Mendenhall and whatever “cute-appeal” he had as a kid actor, or as a kid, for that matter, there’s no point in raising the subject of what I feel was a good role for Mendenhall, for example, in Stallone’s, Over The Top, which no doubt would have been another movie you would have been eager to pan before you saw it.
No, judging a movie unseen appears to be your schtick, Joseph. I haven’t seen Over the Top, and thus will refrain from commenting on it. The world would be a much richer place if your had shown similar restraint in commenting on “The Star Raiders” [sic].
Most kid actors do throw in the towel after realizing that the industry was only interested in them as a child actor, and had, despite years of devoted work, awards, or anything else, made no plans for them in adult roles which go to the established adult actors.
Your naivete is almost appealing. Check my reviews a little further (even the ones that don’t come up when you’re checking “David Mendenhall” in your search engine). You’ll see that I never criticize any performer simply for having a sucky career. Instead, you’ll see me lamenting careers inexplicably truncated (or worse, diverted into movies of little redeeming value, Rutger Hauer being a prime example), and raging against the unfairness of the untalented striking equally inexplicable fortune (two words: Adam Sandler). Nowhere will you see me judging a performance by the performer’s career, but you certainly will see me drawing correlations between that performance and the career. Mendenhall’s performance in Space Raiders bites; and given that his career fizzled right when the attributes exhibited in the part finally faded, it seems no great leap to draw a causal connection.
Enough said. Too bad the subject of this issue is conveniently “locked” at the Cold Fusion Website and cannot be added to, or I would have panned YOU but good on the board at the site.
As it happens, there was nothing on the comment board preventing Joseph from posting this diatribe there; though by happenstance, the board has melted down since and will probably be out of commission until mid- or late-March 2001. Thus, I’ve taken the trouble to go over the manifold accusations here.
And now, some final comments (hey, it’s my venue): Do I feel bad for pointing out the atrocious child-actor performance which is one of the central (though certainly not the only) flaws in Space Raiders? Heavens, no. David has a mother to comfort him and bolster his self-esteem; that’s not a critic’s job. No one has to agree with me (though I can’t credit Joseph with disagreeing with what I actually said, since it’s pretty clear he hasn’t seen the movie in question); but if I don’t call’em as I see’em, then I’m worse than being a reviewer who you disagree with; I’m a dishonest reviewer. I’ll offend as many people as necessary around here, but I’ll be damned if I lie to them.
But here’s something that really irks me about Joseph’s post. David Mendenhall is not currently a child. He was born two weeks before I was; he’ll be turning 30 this summer, just like me. If he’s got a problem with how his performance was characterized in my review, he’s a big boy, and he can defend it himself (as other movie-people have here) or reluctantly admit to some level of agreement (as others have). He certainly doesn’t need the self-appointed president of the David Mendenhall Militant Appreciation Society to fight his battles for him.
Nathan
Subject: Your review of “Image of the Beast”
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001
From: “Brian Christopher”
Organization: WNWC Radio
Nathan,
I was searching the web and ran across your 1999 review for Image of the Beast. I was just wondering if you’ve had a change of heart (toward the movie AND Christianity) since you wrote that review?
Brian Christopher
“Life in the Morning”
Life 102.5 FM, WNWC
Not in the slightest — I’m still a devoted Christian, and the movie still bites.
Nathan
Subject: RE: Night of the Creeps
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001
From: FCDekker@aol.com
Hey, Nathan –
Thanks for the glowing tribute to my problematic but stangely beloved first feature. A few comments:
You say I “wrote the stories for a couple of DTV movies that no one’s ever heard of”. Please tell me the titles of these films, and, indeed, what the hell “DTV movies” are, because frankly, I haven’t heard of them either. Perhaps an evil Doppelganger is out there using my name to insidious ends.
You also say that I “capped off (my) career with (my) final misstep, writing and directing Robocop 3 (1993)”. While Robo fans will be happy to hear of my demise, my family, friends and agent will be less than thrilled. Especially since I have a bunch of projects I’m supposed to be working on, but can’t if I’m dead. Unless, of course… I’m a zombie! Heh heh heh.
Seriously, I’m not gone yet (although watch me get hit by a bus right after I send this e-mail). Instead, I’ve been attempting to re-invent myself, writing a TV pilot, a few features, and working uncredited on shit like Lethal Weapon 4 and Titan A.E. to pay the bills. My beautiful wife works on Dark Angel.
Again, I greatly appreciate your keeping Creeps alive on the internet. There’s an old saying that you’re neither as good, nor as bad, as people say you are, and I tend to believe this. I think NOTC is worse than you think it is, while Monster Squad is better. But what do I know, I made RoboCop 3.
Anyway, I’m hoping my best work is still ahead, and that I can regain your faith in my talents. Keep up the great work at Cold Fusion, and thanks again!
Best wishes,
Fred Dekker
Of course, at getting an e-mail like this, I find myself momentarily unable to make any response but “This is so asterisk-ampersand-at-asterisk-exclamation cool!”
The bit about the DTV (Direct-To-Video) movies may have been inaccurate; Fred wrote the stories for Ricochet and If Looks Could Kill (both 1991), both of which apparently had at least some limited theatrical release. They’re still pretty unseen movies.
And I had not meant to imply that Fred Dekker, the biological entity, was dead, but that, at least by the IMDb, his career was dormant; he’s listed with eight credits between 1986 and 1991, and nothing since; though my assumption that he had gotten out of the business have proved wrong, it was a reasonable assumption.
However, I’m glad that Fred is out there with his fingers in the pie, and I hope that the “reinvented” version can still put out movies as memorable as Night of the Creeps, which I designate as the movie reviewed on this site that most deserves a re-release.
Nathan
Subject: About ADVENTURES OF HERCULES… snicker
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000
From: “Dave Moore”
Hi there. Great site, btw :)
As far as ADVENTURES OF HERCULES… you may find it interesting to look at the original 1933 version of King Kong and then watch the climatic battle of ADVENTURES… which is obviously rotoscoped footage of the Kong/Tyrannasaurus Rex fight and should have been cause for a lawsuit if anyone were paying attention. That movie and the first one still bust me up. Definitely MST3000 material. Have a good one :)
Dave (watching too many bad movies)
Dear sweet mother of Pete, I can’t believe I missed that. That makes the conclusion of Adventures of Hercules just that much more mind-thwartingly insane.
Nathan
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000
From: AmazingBoySD
And almost an hour later [he had sent me a previous note -- Nathan], I’m still looking at your site. Your reviews are excellently written, and I especially enjoyed the e-mail section, plus the Masters of the Universe review w/Gary Goddard reply. I’ve done reviews myself for classes, and in the Oh The Humanity user section for fun, and I know how enjoyable it can be to rip into a piece of cheese like Masters of the Universe or Superman IV (both easy targets though, but so much fun!). It’s funny I found your site at this time, because I recently organized a 36-hour B-movie marathon as a fraternity fundraiser (it’s a co-ed, fine arts fraternity, and quite willing to take on that sort of project). I’ve forgotten that there are tons of movies that can be used for such a project, like Warlock III or Modern Vampires. Thanks for showing me where to look, and count me as a fan of your site. :)
Andre Bennett
Everybody needs a boost to their fragile ego, especially on a Monday morning, and this did it for me. Thanks.
Nathan
Subject: Other notes on the Funhouse
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000
From: Rob Long
The Funhouse (1981)
Directed by Tobe Hooper
Written by Lawrence Block (based on a novel by Owen West)
Starring:
Elizabeth Berridge -Amy
Shawn Carson -Joey
Cooper Huckabee-Buzz
Largo Woodruff -Liz
Miles Chapin-Ritchie
Sylvia Miles-Fortuneteller
Kevin Conway-Carnival Barker
Makeup by Craig Reardon
Good Lord, this movie! I remember seeing this when I was 14, begging my folks to take me to see it. They wouldn’t but my friend’s parents were avid moviegoers, and said they would take us. If only I’d known how bad this movie was…
See, my passion for seeing this movie was based upon the commercials that they were running for it at the time. That, and the movie poster (which was quite different from the video box cover that you see). The size of the Funhouse itself, as well as the way the commercials were cut, led one to believe that the movie was going to be several more times scary then it was; plus, you got the impression that it was at an amusement park, rather than a traveling carnival. I mean, come on. Did you see the SIZE of that structure? All the funhouses I’ve seen while attending carnivals are portable structures usually made from a tricked out semi trailer. This thing would have taken the entire time the carnival was in town to set it up. Their first day of business would have been as the rest of the carnival was ready to tear down!
Oh, did I mention that there was some FALSE advertising for this movie? Aside from the commercial that was made from clips of the movie, Tobe Hooper had the balls to shoot a commercial with two of his actors (Huckabee and Berridge) running thru sets that were never in the movie, being menaced by a POV camera. After seeing the movie, I was really pissed off by the misleadingness of this commercial.
The cast was extremely likeable, and did what they could with the material given them. Sylvia Miles was in Midnight Cowboy, Cooper Huckabee was in Foul Play, Elizabeth Berridge did Amadeus as well as tampon commercials in the 80’s, Largo Woodruff did a film with Mickey Rooney and Dennis Quaid, and Miles Chapin has been in dozens of commercials, the movie Hair, all the way thru to such duds as Howard the Duck. Kevin Conway’s been around awhile, too.
But the movie! Yeesh! The beginning shower scene is bad, for we can see that the actress is still wearing her panties. A great deal of the action (action?) for the next 20 minutes is just showing them having a good time at the carnival, as well as picking up subtle clues to things that will go bump in the night later on. Couldn’t they have set this up with better editing or something? We paid to see these kids get trapped in the Funhouse, and that what I want to see. Let’s get to it, for Pete’s sake!
As I have said, I enjoyed the cast. The inner look of the Funhouse itself was quite impressive (if not believable. A basement in a traveling attraction?). The most impressive kill is that of Ritchie. First getting roped and pulled up thru a hole in the ceiling, then have Buzz accidently putting a hatchet thru Ritchie’s head as he is tied to one of the ride’s carts. Plus, it was kinda cool that this cart would show up from time to time till it reached the end of the track at the exit.
As to the rest of the killings? They have an entire Funhouse at their disposal, and yet the rest of the killings are ho hum. Liz falls thru the trapdoor and get her face messed up by the disfigured guy (acted by a mime in that costume, BTW) and we never do see how Buzz gets killed, we just see his body carried out and a bloodstain on his shirt. Whoopie.
This movie has its moments, I have it in my video library, but it was a far cry from what I thought it was going to be, or what it could have been.
regards,
Dr. Mel Practice (Robert Long II )
Subject: Beowulf
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000
From: Demonicuss
Seen it, and while okay, itcould have been so much better. I agree with you fullheartedly, leave that damn techno crap out of here! You do know why it’s there. Producers Lawrence Kasanoff and Donald Kushner did Mortal Kombat, and apparently believe techno is the “new” sound. While it may have worked for Kombat, it doesn’t for Beowulf. I also think that Grendel could have been a whole lot nastier.
The image I’ve always had of Grendel is that from Goya’s painting, “Saturn Eating His Children” (you can see it at http://www.geschichte.2me.net/pic/aa41a.jpg). Somehow, that’s scarier to me than any standard man-in-suit nasty.
Nathan
Subject: The Funhouse
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000
From: Barbara Gordon (save it, I’ve heard them)
According to an interview with Hooper (Cinefantastique?), all the carnie guys are played by the same actor, and he was trying to create a distorted, nightmarelike atmosphere in the first part, supposedly from the POV of Amy, making her a kind of unreliable narrator. Of course, she’s not the narrator, and this concept doesn’t really go anywhere. The novelization of the film adds a huge extra dimension to the story, interesting because novelisations are often based on early versions of the script and contain ideas that were junked by the time the film was released - that Joey and Amy’s mother was once the carnie’s wife, so Frankie and Baby in the Bottle would be their step-sibs. Joey is generally more relevant to the plot in the book, too.
Subject: House 4
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000
From: Egyptmoon
I really enjoy your reviews! I also want to thank you for warning me about HOUSE 4. I actually liked the first one. I think it was the second one that brought in some cuddly old undead relative and, if I’m not mistaken, a muppet or two. *shudder* I say ever one of the dubious sequels to “HOUSE” should be thrown into a stump grinder!
Take care and keep those great reviews coming!
~Brandi
p.s. Have you seen “Eyes Wide Shut“? Great God of all things overbudget and shitty…that was a stinker!
Thanks. I haven’t seen Eyes Wide Shut — why would I? Most everyone who saw it did so for the skin, and if I were looking for that, I could get a much bigger and better eyeful by looking for the name “Wynorski” in the credits.
Oh yeah, and there’s that whole Kubrick thing. But I’ve always felt that Kubrick was overrated as a storyteller, which I think is the main job of a feature director.
Nathan
Subject: Who’s Afraid of Beo Wolf?
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000
From: “Apostic”
Nathan,
Thanx for reviewing Beowolf (1999). I haven’t been haunting the video stores like I used to, and when I do I usually avoid the New Releases zone. Therefore, I missed this one finally coming out.
Based on what I read form your review, it sounds like they set this mess on the Highlander world. I kinda wished they’d opted instead for cribbing The Legacy of Heorot by Niven, Pournelle, and Barnes. That’d be a scifi retelling that might’ve worked.
Must make plans to see this thing. Someday….
regards,
Mark
Subject: Specters…
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000
From: “ken begg”
Nathan-
Did I just see another video release of that? The one I saw ended up with the monster again popping out of the bed and killing the two leads. I distinctly remember this because I generally loath that sort of ‘gee, the universe sucks’ ending.
Ken
Actually, that was in there, but it was such an obvious tacked-on scare that I didn’t even think it was worth mentioning. Obviously, I wasn’t paying too much attention by that point…
Nathan
Subject: Dr. Butcher M.D.
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000
From: “scott ashlin”
I just read your review of Dr. Butcher, M.D./Zombie Holocaust (which, by the way, also goes by a slew of other titles), and I’m afraid I’m going to have to disappoint you. I’ve seen the film as both Dr. Butcher and as Zombie Holocaust, and the scene in which Lori is inducted into the cannibal tribe is no better developed and no more sensical in the original than it is in the American version. Near as I can tell, the scene exists for no reason whatsoever except to provide an excuse for a prolonged crotch-shot, and while they’re at it, to set up a good old-fashioned Italian horror movie deus ex machina conclusion. It might also interest you to know that Terror on Tape attributes the mysterious prologue to an unfinished film that was to have been called Tales That’ll Tear Your Heart Out. I don’t know about you, but I get the feeling the world is a better place for said flick’s having remained uncompleted…
I dunno, I’ve got an affinity for zombies that actually rise from the grave. It would certainly have been no better than some other zombie films that had the misfortune to be finished. And at least the unfinished footage wasn’t edited by Thomas Tang into a ninja epic…
Subject: PRISON OF THE DEAD 2.0
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000
From: Matt Walsh
Nathan,
I believe what you’re looking for is “cband@fullmoonuniverse.com” (I think; I’ve never contacted the guy via e-mail. It could also be “band@fullmoonuniverse.com”). I do know you can contact DeCoteau at “decoteau@earthlink.net”. Happy hunting! Though, in my defense, I can assure you of one fact that most people (like me) don’t find out until too late: good intentions almost NEVER make it to the screen — there’s always twenty guys who step in with their own ideas, a crappy budget, somebody who doesn’t like what you originally wrote, etc., etc. Unless you do it yourself. Which explains why there’s BLOODLETTING … and then why there’s PRISON OF THE DEAD, WITCHOUSE, KILLER EYE, etc. They are what they are, but there’s stuff you do to pay the rent and there’s stuff you do because you need the expression. I guess that’s no excuse … but it is an explanation. Look for my next expression soon.
Actually, the roundabout point of this e-mail was to thank you for your kind words and great review/contest of BLOODLETTING a couple of years back (not to mention the aforementioned chatisement in your PRISON review!). I’ve been linked to that review on my own site for over a year now, and no matter how much I lose sight of why I’m here, stuff like that’s always keeps me going. Again … thank you!
Kind regards,
Matthew Jason Walsh
ARMAGEDDON PRODUCTIONS
I have to tell you, messages like this warm my heart. As I mentioned in my review of Prison of the Dead (to which this letter was a reply), I know Mr. Walsh can write well, which is what made it so galling that the Prison script, at least as it came to the screen, was so exceedlingly lame. It just goes to show two things:
- Good writers can and do write poorly.
- There’s no script so good that someone can’t and won’t muck it up.I can only wish that some other filmmakers had the grace and honesty that Mr. Walsh has.
