ARE YOU WEARING YOUR FRANKENSHIRT?

 
In a recent edition of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, a new style of clothing has been introduced: the Frankenshirt! Similar to its namesake, the apparel is stitched together with different parts -- only this time with cloth instead of body parts. Several manufacturers are jumping on the bandwagon, including famed clothier, Burberry, who are selling their version at a mere $1,1120. It's about time Frankenstein's creation is recognized for his fashion sense!

PAM GRIER, QUEEN OF BLACK STYLE

Nobody, and I mean nobody would argue that Pam Grier epitomizes the strong female version of the action hero. As a matter of fact, she was the first black female to have the starring role in an action film. Never mind that she got that way from playing in movies that are now categorized for the most part as "blaxploitation"; She has proven herself over and over again in films such as COFFEY, FRIDAY FOSTER, and JACKIE BROWN that Pam Grier is for real. And let us not forget, monster fans, Ms. Grier played Ayesa the Panther Woman, in THE TWILIGHT PEOPLE!

Now, Constance White, former editor of Essence magazine and the author of the new book, "How to Slay: Inspirations from the Queens and Kings of Black Style", singles out a handful of the most notable black style "influencers", and details how each has made an impact on what we wear. Pam Grier -- not surprisingly -- is one of them.

Called by White as "The Bodacious Natural Babe", she goes on to say that Grier was "one of the biggest stars of the blaxploitation film genre that helped define the '70s. North Carolina born, Grier exuded a new kind of on-screen appeal, one rooted in natural beauty and down-to-earth pieces like denim cut-offs, button-up shirts and hoop earrings. As the titular character in FOXY BROWN and COFFEY, Ms. Grier inspired a new generation of women to bare their midriffs and cultivate lush afros. Those halter tops may feel too brazen today, but Pam Grier's sass and confidence are still just right" (source: The Wall Street Journal).

MONSTER MAGAZINE WORLD couldn't agree more. Consider this the MMW contribution to Black History Month!

MONDAY MORNING MACABRE NO. 41

[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal]

UNIVERSAL MONSTER REBOOT GETS KICKED TO THE CURB

I always thought it a little weird that movies are screened to "test" audiences before releasing them. Does this mean that the makers of these movies so out of touch with what audiences want to see that they have to serve it up to them before hand? It's these "how are we doing?" moments that really show how insecure the entire organism of Hollywood is. I wonder what test audiences thought of THE MUMMY, Universal's initial entry into their new, "Dark Universe".

When I first heard that Universal had plans to reboot its famed monster movies, I was momentarily excited. Only momentarily. At the expense of sounding anachronistic, I knew that there would be zero chance of seeing a modern revival of the classic monsters from the 30s and 40s. So far, the closest thing to that was 2010's THE WOLF MAN. Universal lost money on it, as it did not recoup its production costs.The L.A. Times called it one of the most expensive box office flops of all time. Personally, I liked it, with the exception of Anthony Hopkin's character, Sir John Talbot, and Emily Blunt as Gwen Conliffe, and the over-the-top father and son werewolf mashup at the climax of the movie. Well, I guess besides Benecio del Toro's role, the rest of it kinda stank. What made it work were the sets and the atmospheric cinematography. Otherwise, I was underwhelmed. The 1999 Mummy reboot fared considerably better, as it was a good, original story and included a charming cast of characters. I can't say the same for the two sequels that completed the modern trilogy.

Now, U is poised to again reintroduce its line of venerable monsters to the world, calling it the "Dark Universe, and beginning with, yet again, THE MUMMY, which opened last weekend. The results? Tepid is not too strong a word. Domestically, it brought in a measly $32.2 million, while its closest rival, WONDER WOMAN, buried it under $57.2 million in its second week. This does not bode well for a franchise that was, in the past, a studio lifesaver.

The critics have unanimously lambasted it. In the Wall Street Journal, Joe Morgenstern called it "truly incomprehensible" and "defying comprehension". He went on to say that it was "subprofessional chaos with vague aspirations to parody." Ouch.

Tom Cruise landed the role of the adventurous archaeologist who battles the reanimated creature from ancient Egypt (played well, so it's been said, by the attractive 35-year old Algerian/French dancer, Sofia Boutella, sporting enough tats to make the target audience happy). Cruise, who shocked audiences by being chosen to play Anne Rice's immortal vampire, Lestat on the screen, has come full circle in the horror genre. Morgenstern calls Cruise's role in THE MUMMY, "unlikable" and "unheroic". While this is not the career-ender that some critics assert, Cruise is showing his age (he'll be 55 on 3 July) and hasn't been seen in a film of note in a while. Even his last Jack Reacher movie, NEVER GO BACK suffered as much from his wooden performance as the story did, even though it was adapted from Lee Child's book.

In all fairness, I have not seen the movie, and don't plan on it until it is released on DVD. That's how excited I am about it. Universal executives said that THE MUMMY's poor box office performance won't disuade them from releasing other films in the Dark Universe series. Next up is BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN in February 2019. It's a long wait, but it will hopefully give Universal enough time to get this one right.

Below is an article from the new 'zine, HORRORVILLE, describing the development of THE MUMMY.

HE PAINTED ED 'BIG DADDY' ROTH'S CASKET

Custom car painter Greg Cooper, age 63, remembers the day when he would avidly build models based on Ed "Big Daddy" Roth's weird characters and custom vehicles. One day, he summoned up the nerve to call Roth in person and he quickly found himself under the tutelage of the custom car master.

Ed "Big Daddy" Roth's Surfink character.

In 2001, Roth asked Cooper to paint his casket when he died. Cooper obliged. Now, years later, Cooper is once more working on a tribute to his friend and mentor -- a van based on Roth's Surfink character.

This article appeared in THE WALL STREET JOURNAL.

Even comedian Buster Keaton was a Surfink fan.

THE SECRET'S OUT - HORROR FILMS ARE INSIDIOUSLY HOT

LIKE A RAPACIOUS PREDATOR from the type of movie that they seek to purchase, film distribution companies are trolling off-Cannes backstreets and late night film festivals for horror films to bite into and drag away to call their own. You see, these types of (wink-wink, nod-nod) movies have a high market value apart from the crappy comedies and dreck-filled dramas usually found on A-movie shopping lists. That the well-timed  premiere of INSIDIOUS 2 scaring away the competition into another dimension last week, and right after the prestigious Toronto Film Festival no less, only further serves to cement the unlikely relationship between fringe filmmakers and industry giants like Lionsgate.

Horror movies have found a new purpose in their niche role with distributors. Low-budget, high profit monster film machines have proven their point over and over again: that for every handful of straight-to-video throwaways there are one or two potential blockbusters. As with many other films, the trick is having the knack to select which ones. And, while horror flicks have yet to acquire the Midas touch among movie distributors, they still have improved their cachet one more level among the cognoscenti of film dealers.

The Wednesday, September 18 edition of the Wall Street Journal included an article describing the unbridled financial success of the horror film phenomenon. Without coming out and saying it, it makes the argument that horror, if only because of its profitability, is a legitimate film form. But isn't that what we've been saying all along?

ORIGINS OF THE WORLD'S MOST FAMOUS VAMPIRE

The WALL STREET JOURNAL recently reviewed Jim Steinmeyer's latest book -- part biography and part historical study -- Who Was Dracula? In it, he analyses Bram Stoker's motives and inspiration behind the writing of his world-famous novel, Dracula. Citing the usual bloodsucker as provocateur and erotic subtexts along with the not unexpected social analogies asserted by David Skal, he also delves into largely unexplored new territory by discussing the possible influences on the story by Oscar Wilde and Walt Whitman.

Steinmeyer is a more than competent biographer and an entertaining non-fiction writer. I look forward to reading his account of The Count.