Drink Tank 268

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/drink-tank-268 1/8

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268


Cover by Mo Starkey Thomas Alva Edison invented themodern world. It’s impossible to overstatehow important he was to what we’ve managedto become in this strangely modern world ofours. His innovations including the incandescentlightbulb and the mimeograph all made thisworld we live in realistic instead of an image castagainst some far-off wall of Future. The inventionof his that I most appreciate is his contributionto lm.

While there are many people who couldhave claimed that they invented the movies,Edison is the one who would most likely sueyou if you made that claim. His Kinetoscope,and later Kinetophone, were important partsof what introduced moving pictures to theAmerican public. Edison’s company establishedthe production techniques that de ned the rsttwo decades of lm production. It should be nosurprise that many of the rsts of lmmakingwere done under the Edison banner. It shouldalso be no surprise that Tom Edison had nothingto do with almost all of the lms that bore his

company’s name.Edison’s men like KWL Dickensonand Edwin Potter are responsible for many ofthe early advancements in lm, including theintroduction of sound, color, and editing. Itshouldn’t be much of a surprise that Edison’sstudio was the rst to bring one of the mosticonic of all early science ction lms to thescreen. It should also not be a shock that justabout everyone freely copied his lms andtechniques, leading to the earliest form of mass

media copyright violation.Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein had been

hugely popular for almost a century by thetime that Edison’s people put it to celluloidin 1910. There’s no need to go into the story

of the actual Frankenstein, but the way itwas presented by the Edison company, whichnoted that it was ‘liberally adapted from MaryShelley’s novel’, is very different, certainly a moretraditional storyline for audiences of the day. Itwas a simple story, sort of, and while certainlyscience ctional, with a far more fantasy slant.Good Doctor Frankenstein goes off to college,and like many young people who leave home tostudy, discovers the secrets of life and death.

He uses this secret to create a new life home,a monster. He thinks it will be a thing of graceand beauty, but instead it’s a monster the likesof which a more generous god would neverallow. The story is really about Frankenstein and

his beloved and the Creature who is insanely jealous of her. Of course, once the Doctor isfully into the love of his girlfriend. The Monsterruns to the Doctor’s house, looks in the mirrorand disappears.

Trust me, it’s better than I make itsound.

The performers here are really good. Dr.Frankenstein was played by Augustus Phillips, awell-known actor of the day who was in morethan a hundred lms in a decade. Of all his lms,only about 10 are known to still exist in theirwhole form. Mary Fuller, a big time player fromabout 1913 through 1917 who then crashed andburned, played the love interest. The Creaturewas played by Charles Ogle. Ogle was a big nameof the stage who came and did a ton of movies,mostly as a character actor. He did almost 300

lms, a fair number of which still exist.

There is a lot to learn from Edison’sFrankenstein. The rst is it is never east to adaptan existing property. This is a very very verydifferent project than Shelley’s novel. It’s mucheasier to be grasped and much less spooky. It’sa tale of jealousy and the Doctor is shown tobe a much more sympathetic character thanhe is treated as in the book. The presentationof the monster is much different from anyother Frankenstein. He is something of amisshaped conglomeration, far more organicand vegetal than any other version I can think

52 Weeks to Science Fiction Film Leteracy: Week 2 - Edison’s Frankenstein

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268


of. He’s not the hardened industrial monsterof Whale’s Frankenstein, nor the parts-is-partsmonster than Mr. Robert DiNero portrayed inBranaugh’s Frankenstein in the 1990s. While it’shard to judge Ogle’s performance in the lightof 100 years of acting progress, it’s easy to seethat he was in the vein of acting in the 1910s.There’s none of the quiet pathos that many ofthose who have tackled The Creature instill intheir performances, but Ogle does his level bestto get the over-the-top emotion that only amonster can experience.

For many years, it was believed thatEdison’s Frankenstein was a lost lm, that allcopies of it had gone out on that lonely ice oe.It wasn’t until the 1970s when Alois Detlaff cameforward and let the world know that he had aNitrate copy. Not in perfect shape, it was theonly existing full copy (no more than a few feetwere known to exist otherwise). He alloweda copy to be made on safety lm, and laterauthorized a DVD release. This was a big deal, asit was one of the few lms that had been knownas a ‘lost lm’ to be found and then released onDVD. Sadly, I don’t think Alois lived to actuallysee it hit the streets.

There is so much more to this lm. Thetechniques used for the creation of the monsterare pretty lame, even for the times. It was doneby making a wax gure, putting it into a furnace-like situation and then lming it and showing itbackwards. It was a technique that takes back asfar as the Destroying and Building Up the StarTheatre short from 1901 where the destructionof the building was captured in time-lapse andthen played backwards, making it look like it wasbeing re-built. The Star Theatre was something

of a sensation, but by 1910, the technique wasold hat. Still, it’s kinda creepy to see the results.The static shots are typical of lms of 1910,a style called Tableau, though the settings aresimpler than most. It wasn’t shot in the BlackMaria, which Edison had stopped using as theshooting location a few years prior, but was shotin The Bronx, supposedly in one of the moremodern studios that had started popping up.

The Edison company’s list was huge, andliterary adaptations were popular, but it mightbe fair to say that this was one of the mostimportant pieces of early American science

ction. It was a sensation in the 1910s, shownaround the world and considered one of thebest lms of 1910, but it lost importance afterthe release of Frankenstein in 1932 becausethat version was seen as far more importantand closer to the novel, and therefore shouldbe seen as the canonical version. This happened

silent versions getting more attention.The Edison version was dubbed and

shown around the world in unauthorized copies.One of the reasons Hollywood came to be wasbecause lmmakers wanted to make movieswithout cutting Old Tom in on the pro ts.They moved to California, initially to the North(including Niles in what is now Fremont) andafter Edison caught on and started sending folksto shut down productions, to the South, closerto the border with Mexico so crews could eeacross to avoid the law. You can nd Edison’s Frankenstein onYouTube and there is a recent release of apreserved version on DVD to celebrate theCentenary of its release. It is a signi cant pieceof lm history and should be viewed not onlyas an important part of the story of science

ction’s lmic evolution, but as a part of a storyof the study of lm history.

many times, as lms like20,000 Leagues Underthe Sea or the SnowWhite which inspiredWalt Disney as a child,when a better version

would become available,would see the older onelargely discarded. Thatpractice led to the lossof many of the mostimportant early literaryadaptations. One of therare examples was theWizaed of Oz, wherethe release of the newversion led to the older,

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268


SILENT MOVIES: “ATrip to the Moon”and “Frankenstein”

byFrank Wu In 1985, my world expanded. Beforethat, I had READ about wonderful lms and TVshows Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons, KissMe Deadly, The Killing, etc., etc. But if I wantedto SEE them, I was at the mercy of channels 5, 9and 11, which never re-ran anything worthwhile.

In this day of youtube and NetFlix, its hard toremember just how hard it was to see, forexample, Forbidden Planet or 2001. You had to*gasp* wait. In 1985, that all changed. My dad boughta VCR, and suddenly any movie that was everreleased on VHS was accessible. I could evenomg! buy copies of my favorite movies andwatch them any time I wanted. It was like aCambrian explosion of lm.

The rst movie I ever owned with Metropolis.We learned in ninth grade that, to trulyappreciate a poem, you had to see it six times.I must have watched Metropolis ten times thatnumber. Why? Film has evolved, obviously, sincethe silent era. Back then (especially if you lookat Melies work), there was no color, no dialog,no sound effects, no camera movement. Juststatic shots without frantic editing, and worstof all, organ music. Lugubrious organ music that

because there are not always aural cues alongwith the visual cues. However, you have to paysuch close attention that you become too awareof every icker and eck and all the other off-putting aspects of silents. Thus: A silent moviedemands extra attention and then punishes youfor giving it. However The reason a poem needs to be read

six times is that eventually you lose track of theactual words and you can dig into the deepermeaning. With repeat viewings, you forget aboutthe theatrical over-acting and story takes over.You can also relax a bit and really luxuriate inthe vistas of Babylon in Intolerance and hugeskyscrapers in Metropolis.

Last night Brianna and I sat down andwatched Melies A Trip to the Moon and TheConquest of the North Pole and the 1910Edison version of Frankenstein. Shed never seen

any of them before, but she was familiar withthe visual style of A Trip to the Moon via theSmashing Pumpkins Tonight, Tonight video. Bri made the interesting observationthat silent movies are more to be studied thantruly enjoyed. In some ways, yes. As we talkedover the lm (one of the advantage of silents!)we marveled at the clever use of stoppingand starting to camera to make the Selenites

explode. I could watch exploding Selenites allday long. We also discussed how Melies hadused forced perspective. He presented vastlandscapes and laboratories but these were notbuilt in three-dimensions, merely clever trompel’oeil paintings on at backdrops (an advantageof a xed camera!). The scenery is so delightful(and editing so slow) that A Trip to the Moonboasts a higher ratio of famous shots to totalshots of any lm ever made.

We both enjoyed A Trip to the Moon a

reminds you of the dreadiest sermonsyouve ever heard. They say that organmusic is the right music for church,because when it starts, you feel themajesty of God, and then it ends, youfeel the mercy of God. Funeral musicdoesnt belong in movies not aboutfunerals. The hardest part aboutwatching silent lms, though, is thelack of plot redundancy. At the end ofsci- lm today, frinstance, you will SEEthe good guys blow up the bad guysspaceship, and then you will HEARsome character saying Yow! We justblew up their ship! Hurrah! In a silent

lm, you have to pay closer attention,

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268


lot more than Frankenstein. Moon works with asilent movies strengths, with fun effects, a simpleplot, unimportant characters, and marvelous sets.In Frankenstein, there is only one real effect shot.It was created by lming a dummy of the monsterburning, then projecting the lm backwards. The

ames leaping ONTO the monster thus seemlike spiritual energy assembling the tissues. It isan interesting, effective shot, but far too long.The emphasis of Frankenstein, unlike Moon ison plot and character. The story follows the standardFrankenstein mythos: Frankenstein (the man,not the monster) goes off to college, createsa monster, which then goes crazy, chasing thescientist as he prepares for his wedding. What isunique about this version of Frankenstein is theending. It doesnt end with the monster beingdestroyed in a re or explosion. Rather, the lm emphasizes the doktorsstate of mind. It was delusion that drove him tocreating the monster in the rst place. And it islove that resolves the crisis. This is explained in ahelpful title card: The creation of an evil mind isovercome by love and disappears. The disappears

part is fascinating. This is what we see on-screen:the monster beholding himself in the mirror thenthe monster disappears, leaving only his mirrorself. Then the man looks in the mirror but hedoesnt see himself, he sees the monster. Then themonster in the mirror changes into the man, andthe doktor sees himself nally. Using the crudevisual techniques of the time, the lm conveys abeautiful message: Love destroys the monster inall of us. Or, as described in the lm catalog, TheEdison Kinetogram, When Frankenstein’s love

for his bride shall have attained full strength andfreedom from impurity it will have such an effectupon his mind that the monster cannot exist. This is an interesting idea that themonster is not destroyed by ame, but ratherdriven back into the heart by love. Indeed, themonster is only seen by its creator, suggestingthat it may not have existed in corporeal form to

begin with perhaps it was always just a spiritualdemon waiting to be pushed back into a secretcloset in Dr. Frankensteins heart. It’s a strange and bizarre andmarvelous take on the Frankenstein story. But,unfortunately, like many silent lms, despite itsmyriad charms, Frankenstein remains a slightlycryptic, impenetrable cipher, more to be studied

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268


Top GunTaral Wayne In Westerns, the Top Gun is the fastestdraw, the deadliest shot, the most dangerous

man in Dodge. Other gunslingers come from far andwide for a showdown. They want to be TopGun, but you can only get the title by killing aman who already has that reputation. Top Gunsare gunned for, almost by de nition. Top Guns are no less gunned for in

fandom than they were in the Old West.Fortunately, there are no bullets red, and themotivation isn’t envy. It’s admiration, rather.In fandom, artists who admire other artistsapproach them with “requests” rather than .44caliber lead. In a way, it’s the same thing – a measureof the pecking order. The “shootist” with themost notches on his gun doesn’t normally golooking for guys with fewer notches. It’s theother way around.

Among fans, it’s rare for a Big NameArtist to make a request from a newbie, or anobviously less talented artist. It probably speakswell of fandom that it happens at all – as it does.“Talent” is impossible to de ne in absoluteterms, and what one person sees as talentmay be nothing but an excess of style or mereimitation to another. I might very much enjoythe work of ___ or ___ and value their workfor subjective reasons, or out of friendship. Noteveryone will see the work of ___ as I do, andthere’s no reason they should. Similarly, otherpeople see virtue in work where I see none. To get to the point, I don’t think I boastwhen I say I’m a Top Gun as an artist in fandom.

I’m not at the top of everyone’spersonal peckingorder, but according to the general consensusI move in elevated circles. What this means isthat I have a lot of people “gunning for me.”Happily, this doesn’t mean people trying to gunme down, just that I draw more attention than isalways good. Particularly, I attract requests. Lately I’vebeen attracting a lot of them. Some requestsare that I draw a particular character, and otherrequests are for trades. While it is attering, it’s

also a problem, because I almost inevitably haveto turn requests down. I don’t really like to, butthe alternative is a self-sacri ce I’m not preparedto make. For one thing, I only have so much time.Whenever I draw for a customer, I’m taking timefrom drawing something I might prefer to drawfor myself. Not that I hate drawing nekkid bunnygirls with come-hither expressions and lewdbody language, but there are other things in lifebesides sex. Perhaps a better way of putting it isthat there are less blatant and more interestingways of looking at human sexuality than coochieposes. The only difference between drawing fora customer and honoring a request is that thecustomer is at least paying me. My time hasvalue.

As often as not, too, I have no interestin the request. Sometimes I have no idea evenwhat the request is. For example: “Can you draw the third porcupine girlon the left in the swimming pool scene in thatepisode of Heathcliffe where he dreams that he’sHugh Heffner? Can she be naked instead of in abathing suit and can she have a banana Daiquiriin her hand?”

Chances are very good that I neverwatched the show, that I have no idea whatepisode that is, and that I don’t give a damnabout porcupine girls anyway. I don’t particularlylike banana Daiquiris, either. Not all requestsare like this, of course. Some are far more inkeeping with my own peculiar thoughts andfetishes. I’ve even been given a good idea, once

– that I promptly stole. By and large, though,requests are random demands on my time andeffort that in no way arouse my interest.

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268


Requests for trades are even trickier. It’seasy to say, “I’m busy, be sure to close the doorquietly on your way out.” But when anotherfan asks if you would exchange your work forhis, there’s no way you can avoid implying acomparison by refusing. No matter what yousay , what you mean is, “your work isn’t as goodas mine,” and “I don’t want it.” I wouldn’t haveto refuse all trades, if better artists came to mewith a request for one. (There are better artists,I hate to admit.) But for some reason that neverhappens. I suspect they’re of much the samemind as I am about requests, and just don’t veryoften make them. I usually cop out by saying “I don’t collectart.” Then I think better of the outright lie, andadd “except art by my actual friends,” which isfar more nearly true. In fact, when I was going to conventions,I would sometimes arrange a trade betweenmyself and another artist I admired, but who Ididn’t always know well. I like to think I gaveequal value in exchange, but only they can bethe judge of that. But, I also sometimes tradedwith complete strangers whose drawings wouldnot quite make the grade as refrigerator art,

let alone be an equal swap. In cases like that, Iwould usually just take a minute to do a quickhead & shoulders of Beatrix, with a throw-awaycaption like, “I bet that double-cheese & baconhamburger tastes great. Last that I remember,they did.” Later, I’d give away the art I’d gottenin exchange. Face to face, it’s just too hard to say“no.” Also, I enjoyed a lot of advantages atconventions, often going home (from the earlycons) with two or three thousand dollars in

pro ts. I felt a sense of noblisse oblige to theunknown fans who wandered up to me andgushed admiration for my art. Without them,my prints and portfolios would sit on a dealer’stable unsold. On-line, though, it’s a lot more bother.First of all, I’d have to remember the request.Then I’d have to make a point of nding time.Then I’d need to get pencil and paper out, draw,put the sketch in an envelope, then mail thestuff from the post of ce sometime in the nextcouple of days. It’s much easier to waf e a little,then turn a request down. Maybe if I were yearsyounger, and my enthusiasm hadn’t been burnedout by drawing hundreds and hundreds of nekkidbunnies for money, I wouldn’t be so reluctant

to do requests… but that’s spooge under thebridge. No amount of wishful thinking will undothose drawings and bring back my enthusiasm. I’m probably lucky I sometimes feel likedrawing at all. And that, perhaps, is the bestreason not to honour requests. I’m conservinga dwindling resource. I’ll just leave my six-shooter here in thedust, Pilgrim… you can be Top Gun now.

8/12/2019 Drink Tank 268


Letter Graded MailWe start with Eric Mayer!Chris,

Melies in uenced lm making for a merefteen years? Ha. My friends and I were using

his techniques with our Super 8 cameras in thesixties. We did the vanishing man trick, withone of us pointing a ray gun at one of our littlebrothers and *poof* he was gone! What fun!!There was the invisible man, whom you couldn’tsee except for his shoes shuf ing along. We keptstretching the envelope. Claymation and real

re is tough to pull off. We even invented anadvanced technique that I think has never beenadopted by the lm industry. We shot a scenecombining live action and claymation by thebrilliant expedient of having my little brotherperform stop action along with the clay snakeattacking him.Well, by 1915, Melies wasn’t nearly thein uence that he had been. It wasn’t odd to

nd three lmmakers that would see a Melies

lm and then they’d make their own versionsof the exact same lm. It was how a lot of theearly trick photographers learned their craft.

It is interesting to realize how lm beganto expand man’s abilities to create an unreal reality.Today I guess we’re getting dangerously close tobeing able to create technological mirages thatare indistinguishable from real life, or perhaps wealready have? How much is what really goes onin the world like what we’re shown on the news?

How do we know that I’m not one of thosetechnological mirages? If I learned anything

from watching Bladerunner, it’s that we’re all probably Replicants.

Hey now, I know Taral writes a lot ofarticles and needs materials, but liquid snot-- that’s not a material I want to read about.Okay, back in the early nineties I came upona plastic nose full of candy snot at a noveltyshop and took it to a Christmas party wherepeople pulled gifts out of a grab bag. That wasa new and exciting innovation in gross candy,at least in Rochester and the kid who gotthat was the star of the party. Tastes change. Iwas thrilled to nd rubber vomit when I wasa kid. Today they probably make candy vomit.I remember that snot candy! It actuallytasted kinda good! At least north of the border Taralcould actually go and see a doctor. Downhere in the third world he might have writtenhis last article. But if he’s hearing Curly thingscan’t be all bad. How can people not love the

Three Stooges? A fat guy on his back on theoor twirling around in circles going woowoo woo woo. What’s not to like? My favoriteChristmas record was by the Three Stooges- I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas. Here’s wishing you plentyof hippos in the coming year.Best,EricI really don’t understand how anyone can

not love the Stooges... either the ThreeStooges or Iggy and the Stooges! Image from Marc Schirmeister

Drink Tank 268

Documents

Transcript of Drink Tank 268