our title goes back, albeit with a slight tweak, since we keep throwing movies in here.
Mediocre, it was a Penny Dreadful in 1847, sort of like newspaper comic strips now, it went for 237 "episodes" when the only other Vampire publication before it was "The Vampyr" at the turn of the century so the story meanders quite a lot with the main character not having a coherent background or motivation. I'd stick to the later Victorian novels really.
I've heard similar things about it before, which is kind of disappointing. As a kid, I had this great illustrated book about vampires in lore, fiction and film (I have no idea what it was called) in which I first saw that famous image of Varney looming over his victim, his ribs exposed. Sometimes I think that book is slightly responsible for me being into horror today.
Maybe I'll still read it someday, even if I'm bound to reach the same conclusion.
is the only Halloween
movie I ever enjoyed.
I enjoyed some of the others, as you know, but I think Halloween III
gets a bad rap. I get what they were trying to do, and I agree with it. We could have had many different movies based on the season, instead of recycling.
I either have or have seen all of the cool 1930s movies they showed, but Torture Garden and Twice Told Tales were new to me; TTT is actually worth buying, if it's on DVD.
, as part of the Midnite Movies line. (And wow--$5.49? Snatch that baby up while it's still in print.) I've only seen the "Dr. Heidegger's Experiment" portion, though, but I liked it a lot. Maybe I'll finish it this week.
I didn't end up doing the TCM list. I let my wife pick which one to watch after dinner, and funnily enough, she chose Mad Monster Party?
After she went to bed, I watched Frankenstein
and Bride of Frankenstein
. Not terribly creative Hallowe'en viewing, but I'd been in the mood for them since doing captures for avatars and Caption This.