ROBOT MONSTER (1953) in '50s Horror and Sci-Fi Forum

Forum Jump

ROBOT MONSTER (1953)

Author	Comment
Don Glut		#101	[-]
Dec 21 09 2:48 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	TS -- Thanks for posting those images. Yes, those comic book are indeed real, and I do have a number of them. Don
	Remove this ad
gfanikf		#102	[-]
Mar 2 10 8:11 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I was just wondering (and I apologize if this was addressed), but was the black bar over the leading lady's bra(?) in every version? If so does anyone know how inserted the black bar, was it Tucker or a distributor? I always remember watching this for the first time as a kid (maybe 10-14) and besides getting a headache for the poor 3D (because of transfer on the Rhino VHS tape) doing a double take when that bar pops up and leading me to think there was some version with nudity in it. HK AND CULT FILM NEWS Your source for all the latest Hong Kong and Cult Films DVD News and Reviews! I actually said he was da bomb but my main man Dennis didn't peep me right.- Tom "Big Daddy" Weaver.
Dr Stinson		#103	[-]
Mar 2 10 8:19 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	gfanikf wrote: I was just wondering (and I apologize if this was addressed), but was the black bar over the leading lady's bra(?) in every version? If so does anyone know how inserted the black bar, was it Tucker or a distributor? I always remember watching this for the first time as a kid (maybe 10-14) and besides getting a headache for the poor 3D (because of transfer on the Rhino VHS tape) doing a double take when that bar pops up and leading me to think there was some version with nudity in it. The Wade Williams Image DVD has no black bar and their was never one originally on any version of the film. The black bar in the 3-D version was just a joke on Rhino's part to imply some naughtiness which wasn't there. I think Rhino also changed some dialog in their version to make a joke about ro-man going on a date with Alice.
Rick		#104	[-]
Mar 2 10 8:49 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I've never seen it with the black bar, but I do remember the first time I saw it on TV (around 1970, I think) I was surprised by the nipply bounciness of our heroine. Pleased...but surprised. So someone slipping in a jokey black bar doesn't surprise me too much.
Rakshasa		#105	[-]
May 11 11 9:57 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us Links To All The Classic Monster Stills I've Posted: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/30758
bobzilla		#106	[-]
May 11 11 10:02 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Poor Ro-man. All he wanted was a wo-man.
ghoulkid		#107	[-]
May 11 11 11:03 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	But would he know what to do with her?
Bill Warren		#108	[-]
May 11 11 11:50 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Excellent batch of photos; thanks for posting them. I had seen only the middle one before; I used it in KWTS.
Rakshasa		#109	[-]
May 11 11 11:56 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Cheers, Bill. Yeah, I like the third and fourth ones down; she looks like she's practically laughing in his arms (rather than screaming)! Links To All The Classic Monster Stills I've Posted: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/30758 Last Edited By: Rakshasa May 11 11 12:03 PM. Edited 1 times.
bobzilla		#110	[-]
May 11 11 1:00 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	ghoulkid wrote: But would he know what to do with her? Sure. Ro-mance!
	Remove this ad
ghoulkid		#111	[-]
May 11 11 5:40 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I gotta say,I like Ro-man's look too,even if it was out of desperation. Once you see him,you never forget him. He is unique. Thanks Rak for posting those pictures. I'm a bit surprised this movie got the lobby card treatment.
Bill Warren		#112	[-]
May 12 11 6:40 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Those aren't lobby cards; they're stills.
Rakshasa		#113	[-]
May 12 11 7:48 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	ghoulkid wrote: Thanks Rak for posting those pictures. I'm a bit surprised this movie got the lobby card treatment. Welcome, Ghoulkid, and yes, they're stills, not lobby cards. Links To All The Classic Monster Stills I've Posted: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/30758
ghoulkid		#114	[-]
May 12 11 8:36 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	One thing that always cracks me up;this movie runs 62 minutes and they put an intermission at the halfway mark. And on top of that,the intermission only lasts about 10 seconds
Bob Furmanek		#115	[-]
May 12 11 10:03 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The film was originally presented in Polaroid 3-D on two projectors; one had the left eye view and the other had the right. The intermission lasted about 5-7 minutes in the theater. All 3-D movies of the 1950's had built in intermission points for the projectionist to change reels. Seen in its original Polaroid 3-D, the film is VERY well photographed considering the quick location shooting schedule. The terrible red/blue anaglyph version created in the 1970's with the various out of registration and flat segments (Medallion's elements were not complete) is a pale representation of the original 3-D cinematography.
ghoulkid		#116	[-]
May 13 11 7:13 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I remember MTV,in it's early days,played that version. I think it was on Halloween night. It was terrible.
Bill Warren		#117	[-]
May 13 11 12:23 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Bob Furmanek wrote: Seen in its original Polaroid 3-D, the film is VERY well photographed considering the quick location shooting schedule. I strongly endorse that idea. I was quite surprised to see how well the 3D worked, and in how many different ways; you even learn what those damned bubbles are in there for, to enhance the 3Dness. For years, there was a highly skeptical rumor going around that the movie was NOT in 3D at all, that the distributors sent out two identical prints, one coded for the right projector, the other for the left. This seemed all too plausible, considering the overall cheapness of the movie--but then it was shown at the 3D festival.....
ghoulkid		#118	[-]
May 13 11 12:35 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I always thought 3d was an expensive process,even back in the 50's. It just seems strange to me,given it's low budget,that they would shoot it in 3d. You guys are the experts. What was the story behind that? Did they put all their money into that process?
TServo4		#119	[-]
May 15 11 10:58 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Pretty much. They found someone with a camera rig, had enough money, and had a technician (no doubt the person who built the camera rig) who knew what he was doing. Apparently, the company also mixed the soundtrack in 3-channel stereo, as was typical of 3D films of the time, but I've never found a playdate for it in stereo, and truth be told, I doubt it was actually distributed in stereo. In any case, those tracks do not exist. J. Theakston Capitol Theatre, Rome, NY
Babetician		#120	[-]
May 26 11 11:28 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm very happy to finally learn Robot Monster was in real Polaroid 3D. It's the only thing that explains the bubbles. I hope I get to see it that way. It's very amusing, and Alice is hot. Rakshasa's photos are wonderful. Many I haven't seen before. That's what somebody meant by hi-res awhile back. In an odd way, Robot Monster is like an inept remake of Invaders from Mars, one of my favorites -although compared to Robot Monster, Invaders from Mars is Gone with the Wind. Get it? Menzies? Never mind. LOL. Just saw George Nader in The Unguarded Moment on TCM.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

ROBOT MONSTER (1953)