DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Ed Wood's Necromania (1 Viewer)

[Joe Karlosi]

Wood didn't have any "fans" though, until Tim Burton made him cool. I'm saying that the reason you enjoy some of Wood's movies are because they're so badly made, they're hilarious. But that wasn't deliberately done by Wood.

 

[Michael Elliott]

I understand Joe but I'd say the same thing about those Monogram films, Adamson films or even the later Karloff films. I don't think anyone has ever said Wood had talent or that Lugosi deserved an Oscar for his role in GLEN OR GLENDA?. We'd never say THE APE MAN is in the same league as CITIZEN KANE. We'd never say Wood was a better director than Kubrick.

However, that doesn't mean we don't enjoy these films. Even though we enjoy them doesn't mean we have to say that they are "good" films. We can see great films but still find them a boring entertainment.

Wood's cult actually started to happen shortly after his death when these movies started to hit television. The Medved book bumped that hype up and in 1983 NIGHT OF THE GHOULS was released for the first time and I've read it actually did nice business. Burton didn't just pick a name out of the hat. There was a crowd for Wood, albeit a small one, which has gotten slightly bigger since that film.

I guess you could say the one thing the Burton film did right was showing Wood in a good way. From what I've read, Wood was a happy-go-lucky guy until the alcohol finally got to him. This here would have been in the mid 60s. Perhaps Burton would have shown this had the film went past 1959 but probably not.

Technically speaking a bad film is a bad film no matter what. Many of the films you and I love are technically bad movies but we still enjoy them. I love Ed Wood's films but I've never called him a great filmmaker. I think he was very unique in his screenwriter and once in a while he did something "good" but yes, I love the badness. I've yet to hear any Wood film say he was Kubrick and if I did, I'd argue with them over that.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Then we're actually in total agreement. So I'm not sure where we are crossing wires exactly. I guess it's because, while I do own and enjoy a few of his movies because they're so laughingly inept, I don't think he's anything special because of that.

 

[Ruz-El]

The thing with Ed Wood, is, no he wasn't technically that great of a director, but he was far more passionate about film and movies than many of his contempories, then and now can claim to be. And that is what sets an Ed Wood movie apart to me more than anything. Yeah, they're cheap, poorly made, but on the other hand you can just tell that the guy responsible for them was loving every second of it. Does it make the movies "good"? Probably not, but I'd watch one Wood movie over any Michael Bay directed snooze fest. Passion goes a long way in film and any other expressive art, it can't be bought with money, and dare I say, it can even outshine actual talent?

(You knew someone was going to knock Bay eventually, I guess it might as well be me! )

Ed's worse film (that I've actually seen) is Orgy Of The Dead, which has the honor of being the only strip tease movie I've seen that coul;d not hold my interest. the non-stripping bumpers in the film with Criswell though, where awesome!

Back to Necro. I want this. Any idea on how reliable it would be to get sent into Canada? Anyone try? I have no idea how reliable a company Flesh Bot is, and no one else is distributing it, right?

 

[Shawn_KE]

I would also have to disagree with Wood being the worst director. His movies may not have come out perfect critically acclaimed films, but at least he wanted to put out films people would enjoy. There have been many directors that put out junk just to put something out.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

At least, this was the image as portrayed by Johnny Depp in Tim Burton's movie

 

[Don Solosan]

You mean it's carved in stone somewhere for all of us to read and adhere to? Reading posts at this site and IMDB really brings home how diverse the audience is. No matter how well-liked a movie may be, there's always someone who despises it, and vice versa. People enjoy all sorts of different aspects of the movies they watch, and many of them would be labeled "bad" by people who stick to their own narrow framework for cinema.

The thing that all "outsider" artists do is they push the boundaries of the form they're working in. A little bit of their influence seeps in and keeps the culture alive and fresh. Maybe only one percent of it is accessible to the general public, but that doesn't mean they don't provide a positive function for society.

 

[Ernest Rister]

"It's on a level with laughing at the people competing in the special olympics."

Wow. That's a heavy analogy. I don't think Ed Wood was disabled or mentally handicapped, no more than those who made the "Star Wars Christmas Special" or Herbie Goes Bananas. When I was working on ************** some on the crew thought the film was...well...not much higher on the artistic ladder than Plan 9. One of the grips groused to me, "There is an unfinished film in Hollywood called 'Piece of Shit', and every one of us has to contribute to it eventually." Not going to say which crew or what unit, but the sentiment was not uncommon. Turns out the film was intentionally campy and stilted, and the film is all the better because of it.

Plan 9 is campy and stilted, but not intentionally so, and that's why people laugh at it. It is not *bad* it is *incompetent*. It is, for all intents and purposes, a home movie. We've all made home movies in our youth, but that's the rub - we were 12-16 years old. We don't make home movies in our 30's and exhibit them in theaters and on home video (well, most of us don't, anyway.

 

[Bob clamer]

Anyone know where I can find this movie? There is no listings on DVDPricesearch.com

 

[Don Solosan]

And there are people who seek out movies like these (I assume you're talking about City Dragon), because they're not slick, turned out by the numbers Hollywood productions. Rose Bradbury and bil101ez73 both loved City Dragon, by the way (IMDB comments). The very things you might consider "good" in cinema a lot of people hate. Hollywood cinema doesn't reflect the reality that they know, so they find it in kitchen sink cinema.

As for intention, people who worked with Ed told him "I flubbed the line," "I knocked over the prop," and his answer was always "Don't worry about it." He rarely shot second takes. Okay, so partly that was due to budgetary limitations, but it was also the way he preferred to work. So he knew he wasn't getting the best performances, the best quality special effects, etc. So what exactly was his intention?

 

[Michael Elliott]

Bob---Right now it's only available through the link I posted. I think Amazon.com will start carrying it soon or they might already be doing so. I wouldn't worry about ordering directly from the site. They were very kind with me and I hope to follow this up with an interview at a later date. The history behind this film is rather interesting. They've got the rights to one more Wood film, which should be released next year.



This kinda goes back to the Ebert thing when Tarantino told him reguarding "so bad it's good". How can a film be bad if it's good enough for you to enjoy?

 

[Ernest Rister]

Because it is so bad it is amusing.

 

[Michael Elliott]

Tarantino's point was that the director must have done something right then.

It's understandable that someone like Wood would make a bad movie. However, it's hard to understand some of the bad films that have been made by great directors.

 

[Ernest Rister]

Not when you consider that film is a collaborative art form, probably THE most collaborative art form. A director who makes a great movie may not be solely responsible for its greatness, auteur theory or no auteur theory. Conversely, a director who makes a piece of crap may not be solely responsible for it being a piece of crap. He is just working with inferior means.

Team Ed Wood's idea for Plan 9 with Conrad Hall, Robert DeNiro, Edward Norton, Steven Zaillian doing a script overhaul, John Williams doing the music, ILM doing the f/x and a $100 million budget on top of that -- we might not be laughing at Plan 9 from Outer Space.

Shoot it for $50 with some paper plates on strings doubling as flying saucers...instant comedy.

 

[Bob clamer]

Thanks Michael. I bookmarked for later interest. Hopefully it will become more readily available online.

 

[Don Solosan]

Ernest, you keep dodging the question: how do you tell bad from good when people have such differing opinions on the matter?

 

[Ernest Rister]

Well, no one can tell another person what is good or bad. There is no such thing as a High Arbiter of Art. There is such a thing as consensus of opinion, which can be relied on from time to time.

I think people can enjoy a bad film because it was made poorly.

I think people can enjoy films that are not imidating or challenging and are effectively harmless.

I think people can hate a movie because it is too well-made (the whole "too slick" argument).

I think people can hate a movie because it asked too much of their own input.

Lots of reasons why people feel the way they do about a work of art. How we respond to art says more about ourselves than we do about the art.

 

[Don Solosan]

Maybe they're trying to experiment, break free of the restrictions put on them by the marketplace. How often have you heard someone say "That guy should just stick to [whatever he was successful at before]"? Like Wes Craven making a movie about someone teaching the violin to inner-city kids. What? Wes "slice 'n' dice" Craven and no gore?

Even though there are directors (say, Stanley Kubrick), whose filmographies contain titles I don't like ("Barry Lyndon," for example), would I rather they didn't make them? Is it possible that Kubrick learned something in that movie that translated over into, say, "Full Metal Jacket"?

Is our desire to minimize/eliminate the "I don't like" harmful to the artists and to the art?

 

[Richard Gallagher]

I received it within a week or so of placing my order. They seem to be a reputable outfit.

 

[Richard Gallagher]

Not true. The famous "Chinese Restaurant" episode of SEINFELD, which involves Jerry, Elaine & George trying to have dinner before going to a screening of PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE, was filmed in the fall of 1990 and aired in the spring of 1991 -- a good three years before Burton's film. Anybody who regularly watched the "Chiller Theater"-type late night TV shows in the fifties and sixties knew about PLAN 9 and BRIDE OF THE MONSTER.

As for the accuracy of Burton's film, he certainly took some liberties and condensed some events, but the storyline of the film ends in 1957 with the first L.A. screening of PLAN 9 (the official release of the film was in 1959). I'm unaware of any evidence that Ed Wood had a serious drinking problem during the period of time which is covered by the film. He didn't get into soft-core porn until the late sixties (unless you consider ORGY OF THE DEAD soft-core porn, but then again Ed Wood didn't direct ORGY OF THE DEAD).

I met Ed Wood's first cousin, Tom McDonald, several times before his death in 1996, and he told me that ED WOOD is generally accurate and that Johnny Depp's performance is dead-on. I also met Conrad Brooks at the Film Forum in New York City, and he told me that Ed was an extremely upbeat, likeable guy until his downward spiral into alcoholism in the seventies.