The Ohio Sci-Fi and Horror Marathons

I suggest the 1988 horror/action/comedy 'Dead Heat'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jus4GsEkSIQ

_________________

Dead Heat? The Vincent Price paycheck movie?

Older Films Wishlist:
House on Haunted Hill
The Haunted Palace
The Raven
House of Wax
Horror Express (w/Peter Cushing & Telly Savalas)
The Wolfman (universal monsters)
The Devil Rides Out

80's Film Wishlist:
Popcorn
Poltergeist
Fright Night
Ghostbusters
Night of the Creeps
Monster Squad
Lost Boys
Creepshow

Odd Request:
Monster House

_________________
mmmmm....cryptobiosis

teen wolf and harry and the hendersons

I'd also love to see Guillermo del Toro's Cronos as well

I wouldn't be surprised to see Cronos make a return appearance in the Marathon lineup in the near future. I recently revisited it (for the first time since I saw it at the 1993 Night of the Living Drexel!) on the excellent Criterion disc, and it holds up quite well.

Dude I like your style!!

_________________
Jaws3dfan®
Follow me on Twitter

Your recent posts have got me curious. Not including premieres, have you ever booked anything for a marathon that you don't particularly care for, but is "good" for the marathon or puts butts in seats? Or worse yet, something you hate (the way Tim hates Suspiria for instance)?

_________________
Aliens? Us?
Is this one of your Earth "jokes?"

That's a good question, and one that some of my long time Marathon-attending friends have debated over the years. There have been some premieres that I've had a hand in booking which haven't turned out to be that hot, but I almost always had moderate to high hopes for them going into the event. Aside from that, I can't think of a single feature that I (or Bruce and I jointly) booked that I didn't care for. My taste in film is fairly wide-ranging, and I like to think that my taste in the horror genre follows suit.

Now, hypothetically if there was a film I didn't like that would be a guaranteed draw, would I book it? Probably. The only way that I could see not doing that is if this hypothetical film would damage the overall credibility of the event or merely serve as a one time hot draw for non-regulars without any lasting positive effect on the Marathon.

At the same time, the Columbus Marathons have always been a dual reflection of the audience and the organizers. It's why the Sci-Fi Marathons that Bruce has organized are slightly different than the ones in Boston, and it's why the Horror Marathons he organized at the Drexel North were slightly different than the ones I organized at Studio 35 (even though I fully admit to attempting to carry on the tradition of his Marathons that so scarred...uh, I mean inspired me in the first place). If the programming of the Marathons didn't reflect the vision (yes, an overused term, but a valid one) of the organizers, the events themselves probably wouldn't quite be the same.

Since Joe mentions the Boston SF marathon, I will happily "admit" that I booked Carpenter's THE THING at last year's event although I believe it is almost certainly one of the Top 10 Most Overrated SF films of ALL TIME!

BUT ---- I know that the vast majority of Marathoners (Boston,and, I'm certain, Ohio) disagree. THE THING was "good" for the Marathon, so I went for it.

And, yes, it both:

1. Went over very well with the crowd, with many calling it their favorite film of that Marathon.

2. Still is one of the Top 10 Most Overrated SF Movies of All Time! In fact, it may now be in the Top 5!

_________________
Long Live the Orson Welles Cinemas

I have a request: no 3D.

Or if you really feel the need to show a 3D film, put it in the 8pm slot so I can go out to dinner.

At this point, it looks like the only film that we might possibly show in 3-D would be Flesh for Frankenstein, and even that is a long shot depending on if we can procure the correct equipment. Put it this way: if we can't be assured in advance that a potential 3-D presentation would be of good quality, we'll show the 2-D print.

Showing Andy Warhol's Frankenstein in 2D would be like showing The Green Slime via DVD Projection...It will be ok but just not the preferred method.

Remember Andy Warhol is an artist and this was his artistic vision for Frankenstein and 3-D was the medium he choose to use. A 2D screening is better than no screening at all because it's a good movie and the marathon crowd will love it, however if it is at all possible to show it in 3-D than that would be the best way to honor the film maker and his vision.

_________________
Jaws3dfan®
Follow me on Twitter

The problem with this is that, by all accounts, Warhol had little to do with the production or artistic direction of the film. He mainly attached his name to it when it hit U.S. release, and Paul Morissey has been quoted as saying that he often resented Warhol's insistence on taking credit for much of his cinematic work.

Now it's true that Morrissey shot the film with 3-D intentions, but to say that showing it flat doesn't honor the artist's vision is to ignore all of the transgressive, gory, erotic and just plain whacked out content that lies at the heart of the film. After all, most of the prime 3-D material is relegated to some violent money shots. It would be great to show it in 3-D, but I get the feeling that the audience will still appreciate its gonzo lunacy if we end up showing it flat.

I think you missed part of my post

"A 2D screening is better than no screening at all because it's a good movie and the marathon crowd will love it"

_________________
Jaws3dfan®
Follow me on Twitter