————————–
The movie we discussed in this week’s episode guide was Roger Corman’s “The Undead.”
As Bill says in his write up: “Next time you have the notion to defend Roger Corman as a good director, watch this movie and repent.”
But there is one group that has not repented: The Motion Picture Academy’s Board of Directors, which recently voted to give ol’ Rog an honorary Oscar.
What do YOU think?
To help you discuss this topic, I could have gone to “Daddy-O’s Drive-In Dirt” and put together a list of the Corman movies done by MST3K but alert reader Dave (aka Finnias Jones) kindly did it for me. (Thanks Dave!)
Producer/Director:
• 311 – IT CONQUERED THE WORLD
• 315 – TEENAGE CAVEMAN
• 317 – VIKING WOMEN AND THE SEA SERPENT
• H01 – THE DAY THE WORLD ENDED (which I consider “canon” though purists might not. I wasn’t there at the time, but both extant versions are good, even if the riffing is inaudible and not the product of Best Brains, just the fans)
• 503-Swamp Diamonds
• 511-Gunslinger
• 806 The Undead
Exec. Producer:
• 406-Attack of the Giant Leeches
• 618-High School Big Shot
• 701 – Night of the Blood Beast
Of course Roger is responsible for many more movies, some better, some worse (CT’s “Wasp Woman” is his, and as producer: “Rock ‘n’ Roll High School,” the original “Death Race 2000,” etc.)
So what do you think of Roger? Does he deserve the Oscar or should he be, as one poster wrote in the episode guide thread, “indicted for crimes against cinema”?
(Me: Although I know he has been a mentor to several guys who went on to be good, and while I am grateful for him for providing some great MSTing fodder, I agree with Bill.)
) to help our users cope with "trolls" and other commenters whom they find annoying. Go to our
Corman was a crappy director, period.
However, his production/distribution company–New World–successfully brought classic foreign films by Bergman and Fellini to American audiences. He also gave many young directors (like Francis Ford Coppola and Martin Scorsese) their first shot at filmmaking. Were it not for Corman, we might have never gotten The Godfather or Taxi Driver.
I know Roger Corman influenced more “important” people, but I just want to give him a THANK YOU FOR JOE DANTE Award.
As long as Crow and Tom Servo give his induction speech, in cool with it. :)
in response to #87, which was in response to my #84:
Without a doubt, Corman and his ilk (AIP, for example) have direct links to the modern Hollywood blockbuster. These guys were making MONEY, hand over fist, by not really spending too much. In general, B pictures had style without a lot of substance. What did they promote about their pictures? The sex, drugs, violence, cars, explosions, etc., these are the things they used to distract you from the lack of character development or plot or the basic mechanics of storytelling (sounds like Michael Bay, eh?). In fact, these films were often sold to investors based on merely some outrageous movie poster that Corman had whipped up. What I am getting at, is that the PRACTICES of Corman and others became that of the Hollywood establishment. Essentially, B-PICTURES BECAME A-PICTURES. That’s my point. When what is essentially a B-Picture (Star Wars, JAWS, Armageddon, Jurassic Park) gets made at a studio and goes on to make a sh*t-ton of money, the people at the studio will say, “well, hell, lets make another one!” Why? Because studio people are stupid and can only see dollar $igns. To me (as well as dozens of film theorists; I AM NOT ALONE), it is obvious when you look at something like GI Joe or Van Helsing or the Mummy or Fast and Furious or any other B.S. that Hollywood puts out on a regular basis and see how Roger Corman had an influence on them. A good influence? Maybe, maybe not. . .but an influence, all the same.
Corman has inflicted (as director, producer, exec producer) more cinematic pain than any other director that comes to mind. On the other hand, as has been noted, the Oscars are a self-congratulating sham. Personal opinion: Bane. His movies are awful, the volume of excrement far outweighs the alleged “good” he may have done. MST made some of his films watchable, but not one is a “go-to” episode for me. I’ve seen PARTS of his Poe films (House of Usher, pit and pendulum) and they are, to me, typically Corman: unabashedly uninterting; interminably dull. Dreck, utter dreck. But, hey! That’s what wins Oscars!
But didn’t the Oscars recently grant a lifetime honorary award to Dino de Laurentis? That pretty much decimated the Academy’s reputation long before anyone thought of awarding to prize to Uncle Rog.
Dino de Laurentiis won an Academy Award? I withdraw any objections. Dino de Laurentiis makes Roger Corman look like Robert Evans.
I think Roger corman should get oscar because MSt3k has made him. Yes You heard me. With out MStk Most us wouldn’t know who Roger Corman was expect guy did “Little Shop horror.” and he would gotten this oscar. So there fore an Oscar for Roger Corman is Oscar for MST3k. And he should invite everyone from MSt3k crew to Oscar party.
It stretch I just want see Tom and crow next an Oscar. Sorry.
#103, that is an AWESOME idea!
#108
I heartily disagree. I knew who Roger Corman was long before I knew MST3k, and I’m sure there’s more people that have heard of him than our favorite cowtown puppet show.
A few years ago, TV Guide did a minor article that started out straightforward: “Perhaps the reason the movie-razzers of Mystery Science Theater 3000 don’t like Roger Corman is because Dr F never sends them any of his good films.” They do exist. The Poe films are very well done (well, barring the one Vincent Price wasn’t in), and frankly, so was “It Conquered the World.” I liked “Frankenstein Unbound” and I thought “X: The Man With the X-Ray Eyes” worked very well. And if “The Thing With Two Heads” wasn’t a Corman film, it should have been.
Of course, most of the people on the panel grew up with Corman’s films, so you’re not going to get too far on any argument that he’s only worthy of an Ed Wood award. :-)
For what he contributed to cinema, he is certainly deserving of an honorary Gold Statue Thingie. Whether he’s deserving of a real one is off-topic and questionable at best.
Now someone tell him to stop remaking his classics. They are crap and it is for his own good…
And he distributed “StarCrash” to an unwaiting world. Allowances have to be met…
the only reason that “some” of the entertainment community pay some degree of “respect” to im is that ,somehow, Roger got some dirt on on them! If you have ever seen “roger” simpering and fawning in his “mansion” on some of those “tribute” type video “accolades” then you know what i mean.
he got or obtained some dirt on his actors and kept in to use on them.
Only the fortunate who were truly talented got beyond Cormans reach
Give him an oscar for death race 2000, that would make my day.
First, thanks to everyone for contributing to this discussion.
When I read the news about the Lifetime Achievement Award for Roger Corman I was excited because it seemed that finally one of “our” directors was getting some mainstream recognition. Not for any one particular film, but for his work and influence on the industry. I dare say most of us here saw many Corman films on “Creature Double Feature” and their kin on TV (or in theaters) long before MST existed.
Compare this to when Michelangelo Antonioni got an Honorary Oscar a few years back. His films never made Hollywood any money. After a string of Italian-made masterpieces in the ’60’s, his first American film “Zabriskie Point” was a critical/popular failure, “The Passenger” with Jack Nicholson, a little less so. Yet many film-makers still credit him as an influence, an inspiration to the higher calling of film-making as art.
Corman had no such aspirations; his work was product designed to fill the seats and drive-ins. His occasional achievement of “art” is almost by accident. The Poe films (which I adore) are his attempt to emulate Hammer’s international success and are memorable mainly for committed performances from Vincent Price, art director Daniel Haller and cinematographer Nicholas Roeg (Masque of the Red Death). Most of the time however, Corman as a director “just didn’t care”. Though more competent than Ed Wood or Coleman Francis, his films lack the “soul” of those two.
Regarding his influence on Hollywood: “B-PICTURES BECAME A-PICTURES” @ 104: Frank Conniff and the guys at Battleship Pretension made the same point in their recent podcast. If the “Fast & Furious” series had had been made in the ’60’s, it would have been AIP at the wheel.
It’s ironic that so many graduates of the “Roger Corman School” have since gone on to make so many budget-bloated and pretentious films (except Joe Dante, god bless him). Maybe this award is Oscar’s way of reminding Hollywood of what it needs more of: cost-effective films with a good hook and professional production.
As mentioned previously, “District 9” is a current example of a successful, (relatively) low budget exploitation film. Good sci-fi alien invasion concept with a twist. I also highly recommend Duncan Jones’ “Moon” with Sam Rockwell which will appeal to Msties, I think, as it combines elements of “2001” and “Silent Running” with an original flavor. Should be on DVD soon.
1959’s “A Bucket of Blood”, scripted by frequent collaborator Charles B. Griffith and starring the wonderful Dick Miller, is one of my favorite Corman films. A heady brew of beatniks and gore, it best displays Corman’s dark sense of humor, one of his strongest attributes.
I only wish Crow and Tom Servo could present the Corman clip reel at the Oscar telecast.
Absolutely give this guy the Oscar! Anyone interested in his work should read his book How I Made A Hundred Movies in Hollywood and Never Lost a Dime. http://www.amazon.com/Made-Hundred-Movies-Hollywood-Never/dp/0306808749
He was a damn hard worker and started the careers of Jonathan Demme, James Cameron, Francis Ford Coppola, Jack Nicholson and Martin Scorscese to name a few. Yes, he made a lot of cheesy horror and sci-fi movies that were meant to massage the market place. He was a brilliant businessman in that respect. But let’s list his good movies here:
Tomb of Ligeia, Masque of the Red Death, The Raven, House of Usher and The Pit and the Pendulum. All good movies, IMO. He always did better work when he had more than 2 weeks and $10,000 to make a movie. Overall he was a better businessman than a director, but if you read his book you’ll see that with those films listed above, he really DID care about the quality of the product. Most of the time, it seems he just wanted to get the films finished and released so he could get a return for his investors. He produced a heck of a lot of stuff, too. Most of it is pretty bad but I have an affection for movies like Bucket of Blood and Little Shop of Horrors. Let’s not forget Deathstalker and the Warriors from Hell! It amazes me that he continues to work at his age. He just produced the remake of Death Race that was out last year. After reading his book, I couldn’t help but like the guy and I’m really happy about this award. I will watch the Oscars just for this if nothing else.
As a director – meh.
As a successful producer and talent scout – Top Notch. The man has such an enormous talent for making money and discovering untapped talent, he changed the Hollywood landscape.
The most under-rated director given the MST3K treatment in my opinion was Charles B. Pierce. Sure “The Legend Continues” was pretty lame, but if you ever get a chance to watch the original “Boggy Creek” flick or “The Town That Dreaded Sundown” or “The Moonshiners”, he did the most with the least, and created some effective films.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: “Little Shop Of Horrors,” punks.
I know a lot of the articles at Satellite News are deliberately written to set off fanboy piss-fights, and a lot of MST fanboys belong to the “I think everything sucks, so you know I’m smart” camp…but Jesus Christ, Sampo. That list is cherry-picking exclusion at its most spineless.
(And to whomever wrote “we wouldn’t know LSOH if it wasn’t for MST3K;” if you need Comedy Central to teach you about film history, there are bottles under the bathroom sink just crying for you to drink up and make the world a better place. Don’t wait!)
Hmm. i think Miss Manners needs to have a nice quiet chat with Happenstance. Relax, guy. Repeat to yurself: “It’s just a show, i should really just relax.”
Y’know, if Jim Mallon knows what’s good for him, he’s on the horn to Tom Sherak right now, begging him for the exposure. I would actually watch if I knew that was going to happen.
LSOH was done by mst3k?? how did I miss that episode???
Did Happenstance really just call us all “punks”??
I think that is the first time I’ve ever seen someone not in a “Dirty Harry” or some other pre-1980’s cop film use that term in a serious manner. :lol:
Corman deserves the honor, without question. While much of his work left quite a bit to be desired(thanks to low budgets more often than not), he did indeed often get the most out of what he had to work with. Look at what he did with ‘The Terror’; could you imagine what Ed Wood or Coleman Francis would have churned up in four days of shooting re-using sets from another film?
The Poe/Lovecraft-based films he did with Vincent Price and others were great, films I still watch and put on every Halloween season. Other flicks he was involved in, like ‘Galaxy of Terror’ and ‘Humanoids from the Deep’, were pretty good as well. Give the guy credit; he’s light years beyond the worst filmmakers we know of, and much like Cameron Mitchell, never turned down a paycheck. The work ethic was always, even if the quality wasn’t. He had a knack for turning out watchable films on non-existent budgets.
To comment 118:
“That list is cherry-picking exclusion at its most spineless.”
No, that list represents Corman’s films shown on MST3K only. As someone else mentioned, they are some of his lesser films, all the better for riffing on.
Little Shop of Horrors was not done by MST but by Rifftrax.
The statement “I know a lot of the articles at Satellite News are deliberately written to set off fanboy piss-fights” confuses me as I’ve never gotten that impression from my few years visiting this site. Sampo and Erhardt strike me as positive and inclusive in their posts. It seems most people here have a healthy respect for B-movies combined with a sense of humor and love of pop culture.
I have an automatic affection for ‘working man’ directors and actors – people who may never crest the ‘B’ rating, but still do it because it’s their art, it’s their craft, or just because it’s fun. Corman movies run the gamut from the intriguing to the dismal, but they always something more than the typical ‘gray scientists do something gray in a lab’. Well, usually.
A couple months ago my local independent theater showed X: The Man with X-Ray Eyes as part of their Sci-fi Matinee series. When giving his explanation of it, the sponsor and sci-fi enthusiast told us “This is probably Corman’s best film. So if you like it and want to seek out more movies by him… well, you’ll be disappointed.”
Still, I highly recommend X to any Corman afficiados who haven’t seen it yet, for three reasons: First, the opening sequence screams ‘Hey look! We have COLOR in this film and we’re going to rock your socks with it!’ Second, the make up effects for the main character are, while nothing surprising, really quite effective. And third, every once in while the movie descends into a particularly weird sequence that just reeks of the comforting touch of Corman.
And if you do take my advice? There is a possibly apocryphal story (supported by Stephan King, I believe) that there was a line cut from the very end of the film that was removed because it made the ending too horrific. So, it is the duty of all aged-horror film buffs to mentally add in the line as the screen fades to black:
“I can still see!”
Corman is fantastic the way Russ Meyer is fantastic.
Why is this even a debate?
This news actually makes me happy. Sure, he’s responsible for ‘Attack Of The Giant Leeches’ and ‘High School Big Shot’ (and Jim Wynorski -*shudder*), but he also did the awesome Price/Poe films and helped filmmakers like Jonathan Demme and James Cameron get their starts. Plus, and this should be most important to Hollywood, all of his films made lots of money. And admit it: a MSTie-related person getting an Oscar kinda gives you a thrill. :razz:
They all can’t be Orson Welles. They can’t even all be Frank Capra. Second and Third Rate Movies have always been vital fodder for the bizness of film making, keeping casts and crews working and keeping the projectors rolling and the theaters occupied. Without Coreman and his ilk, there would be no film industry as we know it.
And as arguably the ‘finest’ -cough- and most prolific of that category of filmmakers, then yes, he should get an award.
By the way, starting this year, the honorary oscars will be given at a seperate event from the main telecast. So we probably won’t get to see Roger accept his award, unless they show an excerpt at the main show.
Corman deserves the Oscar. I mean, why not. Cudos to him. In fact, even though a lot of his films are a bore most of them are still a lot more fun to watch than, say, The English Patient, or Shakespeare In Love, or Driving Miss Daisy (aaaaaaarghhh!)–Oscar winners all.
The two most fun movies he directed are Masque of Red Death and Wild Angels. The first succeeds largely to slightly better than average script and the cinematography of one Nicholas Roeg. The latter due to the great cast and exquisite over the top finale.
But Corman’s films are not great MST fodder for me. I think I’ve said this before but his films have NO CHARACTER. Well, some, but not much. He directs like a banker, like the business he is. Coleman Francis’s films have character, Manos has character, even Larry Buchanan has character (a lot of really ugly character). I don’t think Corman inspires great riffing. His films are just to dull and flat.
Well, you could argue that Starfighters and Radar Secret Service fit that description, but they are great eps. Hmmm…I think the two I mentioned have character. The Corman film that seems at least headed in the direction of having character is The Viking Women…
But even so he was a major part of my childhood. Late nights in Pittsburgh they showed The Beast from the Haunted Sea constantly, and I still own it on video.
I may watch the Oscars this year just to watch him receive.
Hayley @ 125-Agree with your comments on MWTXRE. I loved Ray Milland in it and I think Don Rickles was in it as well? I haven’t seen it in quite a while but would love to see it in a theater again. One of the better acted and written Cor-man films. I find it funny that one of the few Cor-man movies at that time that was in color was about X-Rays which are in B & W.
? ??? ? ?????, ????? ???????)
Well said, Riddler.
I’ve noticed that most of the defenses of Corman as a filmmaker focus on the themes in his work, which, inasmuch as they recur from film to film, really more concern his capacity as a producer (picking the writers and commissioning the scripts, sometimes from his own concepts) than as a director. When you hear about him as a director, it’s usually amazement at his speed (e.g., shooting “Little Shop of Horrors” in two days), not anything artistic he brought to his films.
So if he’s an auteur, he’s not a director-auteur, but the comparatively rare (or at least more rarely talked about) producer-auteur: a cut-rate Val Lewton or David O. Selznick.
And, of course, you hear about “the Corman school,” the New World/Concorde days when he helped foster new talent. He did it as a way to get the most out of his production dollar, of course, but that doesn’t diminish the importance of it.
Unfortunately, later on, as the indie theatrical B-movie pretty much disappeared, and Corman had to carve out a new niche by inundating the video stores with product, speed and cheapness became the watchword, and the talent-fostering days were over.
Still, I wouldn’t begrudge him an honorary Oscar… as long as it’s not specifically for his directing.
I was under the impression that Oscars were for outstanding performances and jobs well done. Does Corman fit that???
Earlier in the thread, Bob T. Fatherbot put it PERFECTLY: “He’s like a C student that did enough extra credit to finally get an A”. I’d say that nails it.
However, in appreciation of his stuff, his movies made for great fuel for MST3K. Also, I love The Ramones, so Rock ‘N Roll High School gets my approval as well. It’s hyper-cheesy, but fun also.
Wisecracker
I’m with #134: If the honorary Oscar isn’t specifically for Corman’s directing work, then I’m okay with it. Heck, the dude tried to kill “Waterworld” and pointed out what a money pit it was destined to be, but some other idiot studio wound up picking it up. For that noble attempt, he deserves some props.
Here are a few reasons why I agree with the award.
He Produced over 350 titles, as producer and distributor he opened the door for many talented and future great or successful directors like Jonathan Demme, James Cameron, Joe Dante, Ron Howard, John Sayles and others.
He made many bad B movies, but during the period he also made some really good ones like Little Shop of Horrors, I, Mobster and Machine Gun Kelly, just to name a few.
He directed some of the best and beautifully crafted Vincent Price / E.A. Poe classics like MASQUE OF THE RED DEATH, TOMB OF LIGEIA, THE PIT AND THE PENDULUM, PREMATURE BURIAL, TOWER OF LONDON, ETC.
Later in his directing career he’s responsible for many cult classics like THE TRIP, BLOODY MAMA, DEATHSPORT, THE ST. VALENTINE’S DAY MASSACRE, ETC.
He’s very deserving of this award.
If only for producing the film, “Suburbia”, Corman deserves some kind of props. Wait, didn’t he do, “Little Shop Of Horrors” too? That’s a classic. Sure he’s done bad stuff but who hasn’t? Didn’t Kevin Spacey win an Oscar? And Marissa Tomei? So yeah, I think Corman can get one too.
I never know fully what to think of the Cor-Man. To live as the Cor-Man is to delve into the very center of reaching beyond your grasp. I do think he had a vision for each of his movies but lacked the talent to bring any of them to any sort of fruition. THe Undead is beyond unwatchable and Attack of the Giant Leeches? really?
However, at the same time he is the one who brought Ms. Beverly Garland to the national consciousness (at least as we’re concerned)and he did give Jack Nicholson his big break. And believe me the first time for anything is the hardest part of any endeavour. So peripherally he was important in that respect.
AS for his good movies Swamp Diamonds and It COnquered the World. THere was never any attempt at any sort of logic or explanation as to several key scenes. Like how did the girls manage to break out of a prison not even a day after the new girl arrived and not get immediately suspicious. Did they have to use the cucumber monster.
To me Gunslinger is by far his most competent work at any point of his career. Logically sound to a point and the story wasn’t bad (wasn’t good either).
But, does he deserve an Oscar honorary or not? I’ll answer that by talking about one of his last projects that he directed. THe never released (and thank god it wasn’t) bootleg film THe Fantastic Four. All the post production is in it and it looks about as good as a low rent pilot for a new show. AS a by way of example, think about the Robocop series in the 90’s… got it? Okay now think of how it would look in grainy print. Yes it’s that bad.
It’s tv pilot like look would not have been all bad if it not had been that this was supposed to be a major motion picture release.
So, does he deserve an Oscar? Hell, no. And if anybody tries I think that is the last sign of the Apocalypse.
But then again, what the hey it’s Hollywood it’s there award. If they want to lessen it by handing it to him then go ahead. But it does leave the question: WHere’s Colman Francis’ Oscar.
James Dean, one of the best actors ever, did not receive an oscar, though he was nominated for two of the three movies he did before dying. On the 50th anniversary of his death a few years back, they did not give him one, even though they were petitioned.
So no, roger corman does not deserve an honorary oscar.
#139
Corman didn’t direct the 1994 FF movie. At least the IMDB says someone else did…
Corman is of another generation: with Arkoff’s backing he made films in days or weeks; most of them competent, if not great. Those days are long gone. He also taught some of the greats like Nicholson, Scorsese, etc. There’s a running joke to this day: “I graduated from the Corman school.”
It takes $50M to produce a Hwood film today because – today’s politicians like Geithner and all of them in govt from Goldman Sachs and Citi – pay themselves up front, just like bank derivatives; the movie is secondary.
Corman did the real work; and unlike some politicians underserving of rewards; Corman’s earned it.
Here is a funny little thing: from what I understand this year they will not be televising the special oscars during the main ceremony. Bogged down the show, they say, but what in the Oscar show doesn’t bog down the show, hah? Corman’s moment in the sunburst will be televised but seperately…
You’re right he didn’t direct it. He’s listed as an executive producer. So it’s still his deal. THat crazy Corman.
“but alert reader Dave (aka Finnias Jones). . . ”
Alias Critter Jones? Alias Smith and Jones?
On topic, I have to say that Corman had everything but production values. He had plots that were complex and consistent, characters that weren’t cardboard cutouts, and some raunchiness for his era (like Lydia in The Undead or The Gunslinger’s girls) Oscar well deserved.
Just one comment.
WHY???!!!
I will repost my comment @128 and say yes.
They all can’t be Orson Welles. They can’t even all be Frank Capra. Second and Third Rate Movies have always been vital fodder for the bizness of film making, keeping casts and crews working and keeping the projectors rolling and the theaters occupied. Without Coreman and his ilk, there would be no film industry as we know it.
And as arguably the ‘finest’ -cough- and most prolific of that category of filmmakers, then yes, he should get an award.
“These four individuals have each, in their own unique way, made lasting impressions on the motion picture industry and audiences worldwide…” Well, i can’t argue with that.
Hell no. And here’s my reason in seven simple words;
Corman has made new “films” for “ScyFy”.
Like others have said, the honorary Oscar isn’t for his directing and certainly not for the quality of any one movie. It’s for his lifetime contributions to the film industry, and even if you only consider the people he’s responsible for bringing into the industry it’s hard to argue he hasn’t made a huge contribution. As far as the movies are concerned I’m in the “competent but soulless” camp (although I’ve only seen a tiny fraction), but it’s also hard to argue that all the films he produced and the money he made didn’t make a big impact on the industry as well.
Besides, I’m not sure how you can begrudge anybody an honorary Oscar since it’s not like he’s beating out some other worthy candidate. If nothing else he deserves recognition for working hard for a long time (Wikipedia credits him for directing 55 films and producing 385 since 1955).