Well, Monster Kids, all good things must come to an end as they say. Other than a few more from FAMOUS MONSTERS OF FILMLAND, this weekend I'm posting what I believe is the last monster movie magazine scan from the classic years of the 1960's that I can dig up here in the Mysterious Mansion. Over the last lucky 13 years I've posted a bunch from that period, but sooner or later they simply had to run out at some point.
What better way to close things out than the last issue of MODERN MONSTERS? This was a fine magazine and took things seriously, which makes it stand head and shoulders above many others that found they had to constantly poke fun at the subject in hopes of appeasing the demographic for which they were intended. CASTLE OF FRANKENSTEIN was one of the few exceptions. SHRIEK was another, but MM outdid them both with its excellent production and page layouts. One thing I quite couldn't figure out is publisher Jim Matthew's choice of a title. The contents stuck primarily to monster movies from the past, although one could argue they were all from "modern" times. Maybe it was the fact that he worked out of the Playboy Building in Los Angeles that prompted him to think of something a little more upscale sounding. Who knows?
There's tons of good stuff here by Bob Burns, Don Glut and Ron Haydock: an interview with Glenn Strange; special features on THE INVISIBLE MAN and KING KONG; articles on JACK THE GIANT KILLER, BEAST OF YUCCA FLATS, INCREDIBLY STRANGE CREATURES and an unexpected two-pager on Willis O'Brien's unfinished stop-motion film, THE WAR EAGLE. It was evident that these guys were trying hard to put out a quality product -- too bad in didn't last longer.
MODERN MONSTERS
Vol. 1 No. 4
October-November 1966
Prestige Publications
Publisher and Editor: Jim Matthews
Assistant Editor: Don Glut
Art Director: Larry Byrd
Staff Photographer: Tony Stuart
Cover: Larry Byrd
Pages: 88
Cover price: 50 cents
I remember MODERN MONSTERS quite fondly-- I had all four issues, and while FM and MW were still my favorites, I appreciated the more serious tone taken by MM and the equally short-lived (only 3 issues!) MONSTER MANIA.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the title MODERN MONSTERS was an attempt to sound more "mature" and "upscale," and possibly was chosen to reflect contemporary "mainstream" titles beginning with "MODERN" (MODERN SCREEN, MODERN LIVING, MODERN WOMAN...). Not to mention that it was from "Prestige Publications" (did they ever publish anything else?).
The article discussing the use of miniatures in SFX was one that really stuck with me, particularly the part where the problems presented by fire and water not matching scale were addressed. It really got me paying attention to that detail in SFX shots from then on.
Another thing that stuck with me was the Glenn Strange interview, not only because it was unusually candid and discussed his work in general, rather than just horror roles-- but also for another point.
He mentions working with an actress, Victoria Vinton, and says that she "became one of the Wampus Baby Stars, they used to call them in those days." For years after reading that, I wondered what a "Wampus Baby" was. (I figured it was some sort of slang term like "sex kitten" or possibly even an obscure series of film shorts focusing on pretty girls.)
Eventually, I found out that it was actually a promotional campaign of the Western Association of Motion Picture AdvertiserS-- WAMPAS-- that annually chose a set of attractive young movie actresses and dubbed them "Baby Stars"-- IOW, this year's "Stars of Tomorrow"-- at a big gala.
While a number of the "Baby Stars" named between 1922 and 1934 went on to major careers, most had fleeting fame. (And ironically, when checking Wikipedia to see what "WAMPAS" stood for, I was surprised to see that Victoria Vincent was not in their lists, though she has a page noting her work in B-westerns and '30s musicals.)
----
I hope that running out of "monster magazine" scans isn't going to mean WOM is coming to an end altogether. You have so many other fascinating posts on related topics-- movies, comics, model kits, "men's mags"-- that I hope you'll continue with the site, even if the posts are not as frequent.
(Ironically, as I type this comment, my eyes drift over to your "The End" GIF just above a comic panel with a shocked guy screaming "Oh no... NO!"-- my sentiments at reading your announcement.)
But if the end is here, I understand-- and having come to this blog fairly late, I still have quite a few unread blog posts to explore.
Either way, thanks for all the fine work you've done with this blog, John! (And also thanks for putting up with my long-winded comments over the last several months!)
-- hsc
The WAMPUS Baby Stars were a pretty big deal in the 20's and 30's and it certainly helped the promotion of female stars. There are numerous articles in the trade and fan magazines during that period that publicized them. Some of the more famous actress on the list were: Clara Bow, Joan Blondell, Lupe Velez, Joan Crawford and Dolores del Rio. Actresses who appeared in horror films were: Mary Philbin, Fay Wray, Frances Dee, Gloria Stuart, Jacqueline Wells/Bishop, Lillian Bond, Jean Carmen and Lucille Lund.
ReplyDeleteI don't have any immediate plans on pulling the plug on WOM. I still have some Warren books that were published in the 60's to post, but they're not movie monster magazines like FM and MM. It gets a little tough posting every day sometimes, especially since my writing for publication has increased over the last couple of years, but I try not to leave readers down.
And, don't worry about commenting frequently; they are always insightful and most welcome!
It's a great relief to get back on here and see you aren't pulling the plug on WOM, John! I really enjoy the mixture of "pop culture" things you offer here, and I just wish I'd discovered it sooner!
ReplyDeleteThanks again for all the great work you do!
--
And thanks for the encouragement about my comments-- I'd actually taken a break from the internet right after that, because a blogger (on a completely unrelated topic) had said my comments there were overlong and "tiresome" and deleted my most recent ones!
-- hsc
I've still got a little left in the tank, but honestly, it does take some away from my writing for publication (see My Author Page tab on the menu). After 13 years I still enjoy sharing my thoughts and stuff with readers here, though.
ReplyDeleteTo call your comments "tiresome" couldn't be further off the mark. One of the primary reasons for having a blog is to invite comments and interact with readers -- otherwise it becomes nothing more than a vanity.
And, as for the pop culture posts -- I try to involve monsters and horror at least tangentially, but to paraphrase an old hit song by Lesley Gore, "It's my Blog and I'll post want I want to!".