Showing posts with label Lon Chaney Jr.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lon Chaney Jr.. Show all posts

Monday, May 08, 2017

Face Analysis Face-Off, Part the Second...


Chilean werewolves... Argentinian space aliens... and a Swedish Dracula.

In our last episode, I (in partnership with my pals Aaron and Amber) discovered how to meticulously drain the validity out of an online personality test by bombarding it for days with images of various movie monster faces. The results were mostly hilarious, but they really got me to thinking about exactly how this particular Nametests.com game – titled "Which Nationality Do You Resemble Most?" – was designed in order to determine its various outcomes.

Did the test, as hinted at in both its cover and results images, use three pinpointed target areas on a candidate's Facebook profile picture to capture the necessary information? Or was the whole thing really just a hit or miss affair, especially when none of the results made a lick of sense, except in what I would offer up as circumstances of pure coincidence. An example of this would be when Aaron's picture of Godzilla came out as Japanese, which made sense factually. But then my picture of the aliens from Invasion of the Saucer Men also came out as Japanese. The only similarity between the two photos? Both pictures seemed to have slanted eyes. So was the test also extremely racist as well?

[To read Face Analysis Face-Off, Part the First, go to https://cinema4pylon.blogspot.com/2017/05/face-analysis-face-off-part-first.html.]

Often in the full ten days or so that I goofed around with this silly test, I noticed one factor that kept getting repeated. Even though I was swapping out profile photos every single day (and sometimes even faster) while also deleting the previous photo so that it couldn't be picked up by the test again, after the fifth picture was posted and deleted, that picture kept returning from the dead. The fifth picture was of Lon Chaney, Jr. from Universal's The Wolf Man (1941). I kept swapping photos but that stubborn Wolf Man would get picked up by my next iteration of the same test even when I had moved on to other creatures, like Dracula and the Saucer Men. The Wolf Man, who was named as Italian in his original test, began to get new nationalities each time, like Chilean and Russian.

On the fourth time that the Wolf Man reappeared as the selection inside the nationality test (though still Russian that time), I began to wonder, "What if I skipped Facebook at first and went directly to the Nametests website and tried to take this test there?" And so I did a search for "face analysis nametests" to find a direct link. To a small bit of astonishment on my part (but just small), up came a list on Google of numerous tests on the Nametests site which were mostly built around facial photo analysis. The nationality test was sitting in the middle of those results, and I was moved to go in a different direction. "Hey! Let's see if I get either the Wolf Man or the Saucer Men if I click into one of those other links!"

Seriously, that was all I was thinking going forward, and I was really considering how much more of my time this little spur of the moment research was going to cost me. So, having cast aside all good judgment on my part, I clicked on the second test titled "Let's Analyze Your Face!" (which, on a different website might have a whole other meaning and pronunciation, disgusting or otherwise, depending on your particular needs).

And the result?



Sadly, it doesn't say "Wolf Man's Face Analysis" instead of my name, and I am going to dock them extra points for leaving "analysis" without a capital in the title and for dropping the apostrophe for the possessive at the beginning too. (Then again, a quick glance at the entire graphic shows that they are all over the place with capitalization.)

As to the five details in their results of "my" face analysis, it goes without saying that the Wolf Man (since it is actually his face being analyzed) often does think only of love, given his penchant for carrying off the occasional female. (You can make doggy style jokes on your own.) This might tie into his "passionate" eyes as well; even if his passion is not necessarily about love, he is certainly wound up about nearly everything in his movies. Next, it says his nose is "pretty small," but are they just counting his snout-like tip or the entire bridge as well? Taken as a whole, his nose doesn't really seem all that tiny, unless they were basing it on the itty-bitty version of his profile pic they dropped into their graphic. Fourth, if you count his ability to howl crazily like nobody's business, then you could say the Wolf Man "yells very loudly". Finally, he is the Wolf Man. He has stamina and power like few other monsters, and since he is chased by villagers quite often, he does need to be ahead of everyone else.

While I was at first disappointed that the Wolf Man was still coming up as my profile pic after having been deleted nearly a week earlier, I could not argue with the results that I got from this other random testing. The success of this test then made me wonder just how many different face analysis tests the Nametests site had on hand. And so I started to take all of the tests that had shown up on my Google search page.

Up third was a test called "What does your face analysis reveal about you?" If I worried about what would happen if my latest profile pic of the Saucer Men showed up instead on one of these tests, simply by accident but thereby negating this latest fun chain, I needn't have. When the swirly dial stopped spinning after I connected the test to Facebook, ol' Wolfie was back yet again, and here is what I saw...



Once more basing my reading of the results against the monster's known personality traits and not mine (though I am -- ahem -- all of the quite noble things listed above), we are told that Wolfie is "honest and sincere". I suppose that one could mostly say that at first about the Lawrence Talbot character before the first film's transformative bite by Bela Lugosi's gypsy character (who, by the way, looks like a normal wolf and not like a man with wolf makeup on his face and hands), but after that bite, Talbot is really not to be trusted ever again. Even in his final appearance in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein, where he is pretty heroic both as man and monster from the start, he still lies to the boys (or, rather, hides the fact) about his actual identity at first (though mainly to protect himself while he attempts to save everyone from Count Dracula).

To the second point of his being "a brother and a friend," Talbot certainly serves in the Abbott and Costello film as a friend, and he returns to his ancestral home in both the original 1941 film and the 2010 version due to the death of his brother (though in the second film, he arrives home just as his missing brother's body has been discovered). As far as sensitivity goes, certainly the Talbot character is overly prone to letting his mood – whether sad or angry – affect his behavior, and while he may not have a will strong enough to prevent his transformations, he is certainly adept at fighting in any situation. The fourth point, that he is "a born guardian," is the outlier here. You could use his appearance in the Abbott and Costello film to make the case, since he is mostly attempting to protect other people from Dracula and the Frankenstein monster that the vampire wishes to revive. But his actions in the other films are all over the place, and often in increasingly evil ways, and so he really doesn't have the sort of reputation where you could say he is a consistent guardian of anything except for himself.

The fourth test on the search list was titled "Have Your Face Analyzed! Click Here!" You might think that I am being a little too OCD when pulling the title off the list, but really, when you see the graphic, it still says "Click Here!" at the top of it, even though there is no longer anything on which to click. (This proves once more how fly-by-night these operations really are.) This one drew an immediate loud fit of laughter from me when I saw the results...



Boy, these guys sure can sweet talk a wolfman! My (his) eyes are deep and my (his) smile is beautiful. Somehow, via the application of a heavy Jack Pierce makeup design which clearly show numerous lines and pockmarks, my "age by appearance" has been mysteriously halved to a youthful 26. The overall impression line at the end says that "Rik is meant for great things," which announces boldly to me that these guys really haven't got the memo about me, have they?

The next test is one called "What does your face analysis reveal?"...



Hey, everybody! I've got a pretty face! Well, pretty is as pretty does, and this is pretty damn ridiculous. It says in the text section below the graphic box that "one glance is enough to take your wonderful personality in and that's why everyone loves to be your friend". I'm sorry... isn't that called "judging a book by its cover"? And isn't that something you are usually taught not to do?

It does strike me that absolutely anyone could take these tests and not be told they look like a bucket of shit. I guess they don't want to incur a possible lawsuit if people took a face analysis test on their website and were so depressed that they killed themselves over the result. I guess they've never considered those of us who still might do the same because we are ultra-sensitive and sick to death about being lied to like this.

Of course, these tests are meant and built to be nothing but positive in their results. It's a feel good test to take on a shitty day where you need a lovely pick-me-up. Even a white supremacist asshole like Richard Spencer could come home after a hard day of inciting violence against other races and spewing his Nazi-like hatred, and maybe he has had a rough time because he got punched in the face again for just being a dick, and he feels he needs a release from the day's pressure. So, he jumps on Facebook – because he knows he will spend the next few hours on Grindr edging along to femboys with Nazi-inspired haircuts, so he wants to get the light stuff out of the way first – and he runs across the test titled "What does your face analysis reveal?"

Just for the sake of argument, let's put aside the notion that Spencer probably has a flag or symbol representing whatever his stupid ass, neolithic organization is as his profile pic, and just assume that he put up a 320 pixel squared image of his own mug. (Because, while I am hardcore about doing research, I am not about to look up Richard Spencer on Facebook.) Now, any personality test worth its salt in credibility would take a look at his face and go, "Obviously, you are a racist shit-heel with reprehensible, outmoded, and severely dangerous thoughts, and you have a perfectly vile personality to match." Arguably, the line could go on with "But your eyes are so, so pretty"; just as long as it got the racist call-out in place first. Nope, even Richard Spencer gets to have his load lightened by having it tell him exactly what came up above for the Wolf Man. And while the Wolf Man may have been a vicious, out of control killer, he was no racist. He would have bitten anybody... anybody! That is, if Universal Studios in the 1940s would have given any of those parts to anybody that wasn't white.

The sixth test reverted back to a previous title – "Let's Analyze Your Face!" – but with a far different angle to it...



Man, my eyes (or rather, the Wolf Man's eyes) do a whole lot of things. They have been variously pretty, deep, and passionate; here, they are not just "108% flirty" (like that's possible), but they also "radiate power and virtue"! Hold on there! I have a hard enough time just maintaining the flirtiness... how the hell am I supposed to radiate at the same time? That's some Cyclops-level shit there. (Though he did win Jean Grey over even though his ruby quartz sunglasses are definitely not of the flirty variety... or his optic battle visor for that matter. I guess, hanging around mutants her whole life, Jean just got into some weird dudes.) My smile is also "105% funny," which is a good deal more than TBS (who are just rated as "very" in that regard). So, I guess that I need to start my own basic cable channel.

Next up is "What does your profile picture reveal about your personality?"...



So very wordy! No bullet points this time. The second sentence reads, "You are a very goal-oriented person." Since his goal in most of the films is primarily "Get this werewolf curse removed," Talbot never really accomplishes much. It also says that "others admire you because you know well how the wind blows," which is not saying much to someone with fur all over his arms. All he has to do is hold one up in the air and figure that out pretty quickly. Finally, as for rising "like a star in the heavens," this guy already has a complex regarding the full moon; don't get him started on constellations as well.

Lastly, we have "Analyze Your Face!" Yeah, damn it! Analyze your stupid face already! You've been wasting your time with all of these other dopey face analysis tests that you totally forgot to analyze your face!



I know it is only coincidence, but the combination of my usage of a monster picture and the words at the bottom of the resulting graphic tying into Lady Gaga (who calls her fans "little monsters") was just too much for me. Regarding the information above, anyone that knows me will automatically discount the mental age of 34 years (but then again, this is based on dear Wolfie Talbot), and once more, the photo of a monster who looks considerably aged in comparison but still shears my real age by more than half is suspect. The two best points close the action. While I know that one can cut an athletic figure, and also know a great many athletes who are charismatic, I have never known charisma itself to be identified as directly athletic. "He had a charisma that was, for complete lack of a far better term, athletic." Yeah, doesn't work. Finally, there is the complete assessment at the end: "Only angels look like this." Well, maybe in dog heaven.

This was by no means an exhaustive look at the variety of utterly stupid, time-wasting tests to be found on Facebook, along with the companies that are mainly looking to capture your personal information to most likely sell to marketing firms, advertisers, etc. There are likely so many more tests to be tried, but I just kind of wore myself out doing the ones that I did, though I was delighted by the results. I will probably need to scrub my computer history pretty well after this, and will need to dig into my Facebook settings to shut down further permissions for Nametests and whoever else has hooked up to my information in this span.

Looking back on all of this fluff, especially after riffing on Richard Spencer back there, it reminds me that I had at one point considered putting up a snap of Spencer's favorite president, Agent Orange, as my profile pic. But then I really didn't want to taint my Facebook page with his mug any more than I already had after tearing him apart in my posts, nor did I want that "haven't showered for a fortnight" feeling one might get in having to pretend that Trump's picture is relatable to your own. Certainly, the results would have been possibly even more ridiculous than using swamp creatures and sea monsters instead, but those are noble cryptids that deserve our love and understanding. 

I wouldn't never even apply the term "cryptid" to a demagogue anyway, so there is no comparison. Demagogues are a known lot who have been studied non-stop for decade after decade, and their worthless habits are completely known even if a massive proportion of the world still falls for their bullshit without pause every time. The only real word for their kind is simply... douchebag. And sadly, more than ever it seems they are a species that will never go extinct; they just disappear into the wild for a spell. You can't even test for it.







Monday, July 02, 2007

Shock Show Update: Monster Movies on KDOC-TV (Channel 6, Irvine, CA)

Until now, I had only thought of KDOC-TV, a local Anaheim-Irvine station that proclaims itself to be the home of "Endless Classics" and sports a Woody as its logo (don't get excited, pervs -- I meant the style of vehicle, sitting in front of a sunset, replete with surfboard on its roof), as merely a place where I could watch repeats of old Johnny Carson skits right at bedtime. Then, Carson was removed from the schedule, and suddenly, I didn't think of KDOC-TV at all. Sure, they play several series of which I am enamored (The Twilight Zone, Night Gallery, Cheers, Wild Wild West, The Honeymooners, Hawaii Five-O), but they also play a lot of crappy shows, too, and in this age of the DVD, I would rather just get the series I like on disc or on Netflix, and watch them completely uncut... and also not have to put up with a load of commercials to boot. Classics KDOC-TV may play, but I'd rather watch them my way.

However, this doesn't mean that I pass up the occasional episode of the Zone before I hit the sack. The other night I tuned in, and I received a most pleasant surprise. A commercial came on alerting me to the fact that KDOC was going to be playing "Monster Movies, Every Saturday night!" I figured immediately that I would be hit with the usual lump of public domain titles or more ancient prints of old dubbed Godzilla flicks (something I wouldn't pass up regardless), but then came the second surprise. Lon Chaney, Jr. leaped into the TV frame, resplendently ferocious in his old Wolf Man guise! The hope sprang up in my heart that perhaps these guys had gone the extra mile and secured themselves a Universal package. Even though I own all of the classic Universal flicks (at least, the ones out on DVD currently), I still thrilled at the thought of a regular run of these films on television again.

Tuning in Saturday night, here is what met me: an introduction filled with most of the classic Universal Monster crew, all in glorious black and white! Simple, direct, and to the point: "Welcome to KDOC-TV's Monster Movies!" The gate to a castle opens up and there they are: The Creature, The Invisible Man, Frankenstein's Monster, Ardath Bey, The Wolf Man, The Mummy... all rushing at the viewing so fast one can't help but feel compelled to watch the show. Plus, in the mix, four wonderful images of Boris Karloff -- but strangely, no Lugosi, no Dracula. The intro continues: "This week, the all-time great monster movie, The Wolf Man, starring the great Lon Chaney, Jr.!" Here's the deal: whether this is a designed package from Universal itself, or if KDOC did more than just slap their logo and announcer over the designed package, the effect of both the ads and the intro is immensely appealing, and kudos should go out to whomever is responsible.

Even though I own the DVD for Wolfie's epic, I watched regardless of this fact. The only things I dreaded were the interruption of commercials, and the disappointment I would feel if my eyesight were saddled with a sorry-looking print. But the commercial breaks were swift, and spaced around 12 minutes apart, leaving one time to really sink their fangs into the flick before being jolted away. Best of all, despite a two-hour time slot on the guide, the film ended at 10:31 p.m., meaning that even with ads, the seventy minute film only took just over ninety minutes. (They filled the time with an unannounced Zone.)

Late in the show, they ran a promo for next week's film, The Mummy, and it was especially pleasing to hear them pay the proper obeisance to Karloff, referring to him as "The One and Only Boris Karloff." This is a very important point, because I am not thinking of myself when I feel joy over the airing of this series of films; I am thinking of the next generation of movie nuts and horror fiends. My own personal introduction to the Universal Monsters and many, many others came via an after-school matinee show on KTVA-TV Channel 11 in Anchorage, Alaska, though that particular time-slot filler didn't have any attempt at surrounding the watcher with monster knowledge or imagery; they simply showed the films and didn't comment on them otherwise. But I happily blundered into watching them, in much the same way that I hope younger viewers of today might discover these films for themselves. And part of this process is falling in love with Karloff and Chaney and Lugosi and Rains, and it helps that this show goes the extra step in putting their names quite clearly before their audience.

Looking at the channel's website, I checked out the page where they list the upcoming films through September 1st, and I do indeed have all of the films listed. The last Saturday of August, though, brings us William Castle's I Saw What You Did (which I have never seen) and then September 1st has The Deadly Mantis, an OK film with a pretty sweet monster that is nonetheless nowhere to be found on DVD yet (and that I first saw on that long gone KTVA Channel 11 matinee show in the '70s). 

So, I will definitely be taking the opportunity to sit down to watch these two films, and will certainly have the show on in the background on the other Saturdays, should I fail to have anything else to do outside the home on those nights. Mainly, it will be for the atmosphere (if I really want to watch The Mummy's Curse, I will simply watch it flat out on disc), and to give myself the warm feeling that, somewhere out there, new fans are hopefully being created by some of the oldest denizens of the scare game. They've got to do it; today's fiends simply aren't up to the task.

Sunday, December 03, 2006

Rixflix A to Z: Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)

Director: Charles T. Barton
Universal, 1:23, b/w 
Crew Notables: Bud Westmore (makeup), Walter Lantz (animation), Eddie Parker (stunts) 
Cast Notables: Abbott and Costello, Lon Chaney Jr. (Lawrence Talbot/The Wolf Man), Bela Lugosi (Count Dracula), Lenore Aubert (Dr. Sandra Mornay), Jane Randolph (Joan Raymond), Glenn Strange (The Monster), Frank Ferguson (Mr. McDougal), Vincent Price (the voice of the Invisible Man), Charles Bradstreet (Prof. Stevens) 
TC4P Rating: 7

Abbott: I know there's no such person as Dracula! You know there's no such person as Dracula!
Costello: But does Dracula know it?

As it was with me, this is the film that the youthful monster enthusiast should perhaps first see before progressing on to the older, darker fantasies that preceded it in the Universal canon. Not that I had any choice in the matter; it was by sheer providence that this was my cinematic introduction to Universal's versions of Dracula, the Frankenstein Monster, and the Wolf Man (and to a far lesser degree, the Invisible Man). I certainly knew of the creatures; it's hard for someone in our culture not to know those names, whether interested in the genre of horror or not. But this film provided a major catalyst for me, and it was not long before I was scouring the Eagle River Public Library and the library at my elementary school for more information on these and similar creatures and films.

Two elements of this film with whom I was already fairly well acquainted at the time were Abbott and Costello, having first seen them in a television double feature of Hold That Ghost and Abbott and Costello Go to Mars one Christmas morning the winter before I saw this film. But my first introduction to the pair was on an Old Time Radio cassette which held on one side the complete radio show in which they performed their famous "Who's on First?" routine (a Danny Kaye broadcast was on the other side), and to say that I played the hell out of that tape would be backed up by the fact that I eventually wore the thing out to the point where I purchased another copy of the same cassette tape a couple of years later. My baseball fanaticism of those years had also unwittingly bought me a ticket into the slapstick-and-wordplay world of Abbott and Costello; it was my increasing interest in horror movies that would seal the pact forever. My worlds came together.

That the film is excellent entertainment, even outside of being a fun monster mash, is seemingly a happy accident. This is Bud and Lou at their sharpest, and even the flintiest throwaway gag bounces back, if not with laughter, then an amused smile from the viewer. The opening credits reveal the creatures to us in charming animation produced by Walter Lantz, and even makes sure to include the fourth monster at large in the film: Lenore Aubert, a femme fatale scientist who pretends to be enamored of Costello so that she may steal his brain later in the film. This is not out of respect for his grey matter, but rather for his lack of it. Aubert's employer, Count Dracula, wants to place it in the Frankenstein monster so that he will become more "pliable," to use the Count's term. Larry Talbot, the Wolf Man, played with earnest charm by Lon Chaney, Jr., shows up to convince Bud and Lou to help him stop Dracula. Only Costello believes him, as usual, and mistaken identity monster chaos becomes the order of the day.

Everyone in this film, even Bela Lugosi, seems to be having a great time, and maybe that is why it still plays so well today, much more so than the later Abbott and Costello monster films where the elements sank back into the formula they were meant to subvert. While the monsters don't really get to be themselves fully in this family comedy – only one person dies at the Monster's hands and Wolfie only gets to scratch someone, though Drac does get to make a conversion for two points (those points being on the ends of his fangs, that is...) – the film itself, while a comedy, always takes the situation of their mounting threat to humanity seriously. Surprisingly, the monsters are not belittled in any way, but paid the respect due to the truly terrifying amongst the creatures of the night. It seems more like someone just planted Bud and Lou into the middle of the monsters' normal machinations, instead of taking a formula Abbott and Costello comedy and just adding monsters to it. However they did it, the results are still marvelously entertaining and the film is a must for perennial Halloween viewing. It is in my household anyway.

Most importantly, after this film, I knew for certain that Dracula was a real person, if even Dracula himself might not acknowledge it. But, to my joyous surprise, there was so much more to learn about the Universal Monsters. It would just take a little while for me to "collect 'em all" on my viewing list.

RTJ

[This review was edited and updated with new photos on 11/14/2016.]

The 50 Something or Other Songs of 2017: Part 2

In our last exciting episode, I reviewed tracks 50 through 31 on Rolling Stone's list of the Best 50 Songs of 2017 . How did those ...