Creature from the Black Lagoon's Recent Activity - Spout

Film:Creature from the Black Lagoon

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 06:52:05 GMT

Title: Creature from the Black Lagoon
Year: 1954
Director: Jack Arnold
Plot: Universal Pictures introduced audiences to yet another classic movie monster with this superbly crafted film, originally presented in 3-D. The story involves the members of a fossil-hunting expedition down a dark tributary of the mist-shrouded Amazon, where they enter the domain of a prehistoric, amphibious "Gill Man" -- possibly the last of a species of fanged, clawed humanoids who may have evolved entirely underwater. Tranquilized, captured, and brought aboard, the creature still manages to revive and escape -- slaughtering several members of the team -- and abducts their sole female member (Julie Adams), spiriting her off to his mist-shrouded lair. This sparks the surviving crewmen to action -- particularly those who fancy carrying the girl off themselves. Director Jack Arnold makes excellent use of the tropical location, employing heavy mists and eerie jungle noises to create an atmosphere of nearly constant menace. The film's most effective element is certainly the monster itself, with his pulsating gills and fearsome webbed talons. The creature was played on land by stuntman Ben Chapman and underwater by champion swimmer Ricou Browning -- who was forced to hold his breath during long takes because the suit did not allow room for scuba gear. The end result was certainly worth the effort, proven in the famous scene where the Gill Man swims effortlessly beneath his female quarry in an eerie ballet -- a scene echoed much later by Steven Spielberg in the opening of Jaws. ~ Cavett Binion, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 4
Number of Lists: 20
Number of blog posts: 3
Number of discussion threads: 6
SpoutRating: 3

Spout Post: 5 Movies That Totally Ruined the Theory of Evolution

Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:01:19 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/9/2008 6:01:19 PM
Body: Last week, Roger Ebert finally got around to destroying reviewing Ben Stein’s anti-evolution film, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Ebert’s rant is as cerebral as it is merciless, and it’s worth a read even if you haven’t seen the film. He makes some good points about how the film completely misunderstands the concepts of probability and selection, forming flashy but ultimately useless argument. Ebert’s rage is thinly veiled. He’s obviously upset that clear logical fallacies can go unnoticed by so many people. Sure, misreading Darwin while attempting to refute him is a lame move when engaging in scientific debate, but the practice is quite common when it comes to filmmaking. When movies deal with evolution, there’s an unspoken understanding that they can completely distort the theory beyond recognition. It’s kind of like calling someone a pedophile during a Friar’s Club Roast, everyone knows it isn’t true, and it’s all in good fun. When you look at it in this way, Expelled is just the latest in a long line of films that distort the theory of evolution to make a buck. Here are 5 more that are guilty of crimes against the origin of humanity: Evolution This 2001 sci-fi/horror/comedy, directed by Ivan Reitman (of Ghostbusters fame), makes one of the most common errors in depicting evolution on film: the process happens much too quickly. It’s the result of an understandable dilemma. Evolution is cool and scary because species can transform into other species and become more advanced, but it takes too long! In the film, a meteor strikes the Earth and deposits a pile of primordial goo. The goo starts evolving like crazy, so that it’s a serious threat to the world in like, a week. While it’s true that simple life forms, left to there own devices, can evolve into something more advanced, it takes soooooo much longer than that. I know it’s a comedy and everything, but still, the real process is mind-numbingly slow. Planet of the Apes At first glance, Planet of the Apes seems to jive with Darwin’s theory pretty well. Not so fast, there are several problems. In case you haven’t seen it, Chuck Heston and friends have spent 2,006 years frozen on a space mission when they crash-land on a planet inhabited by intelligent apes and savage humans. (Spoiler alert) The planet is Earth, humans lost their superiority due to some calamity, allowing other primates to evolve into an advanced intelligence. There are two big problems here. One, there is no reason why the humans who survived the apocalypse would devolve. Sure, their society was destroyed, but that wouldn’t cause natural selection to reverse. If anything, the tough conditions would speed human evolution by eliminating the weak. The second problem is speed issue again. Heston and his pals were only gone for about one hundred human/ape generations, not nearly enough time to account for the changes to either species. The Descent This killer British horror film features an all-female cast of cave explorers who are attacked by pale humanoids known as “crawlers.” Writer/director Neil Marshall described the crawlers as cavemen who stayed in the caves, adapting perfectly to that environment. Sounds pretty good, except that there were never any cavemen in the Appalachian Mountains, where the film takes place. Humans first sprang up in Africa, and spread out from there, fully capable of dwelling on the surface of the Earth. While the nomads who came to North America probably did duck in caves to avoid rain, there would be no logical reason to stay there, because all the good food was outside. Waiting for wayward spelunkers to eat just isn’t a viable survival tactic in the long term. Jurassic Park The problems with Spielberg’s classic CGI dinosaur romp have more to do with cloning than evolution, but because both rely heavily on a proper understanding of genetics, it still counts. First of all, harvesting dinosaur DNA from mosquitoes lodged in amber would be extremely difficult. The film (and book) accounts for this by stating that missing chunks of the genome are replaced by genes from frogs and reptiles and such. Even if this could work, the resulting animals would not be dinosaurs, they would be part dinosaur and part frog, which sounds cool, but the organism would probably just die right away. Even if they could create a viable dinosaur cell nucleus, they wouldn’t have a dinosaur host cell, or oocyte, to put it into, which you need to make a clone. If that weren’t enough, most of the dinosaurs in the film aren’t from the Jurassic period, but the Cretaceous period. Creature from the Black Lagoon In this classic monster movie, a team of scientists hunt for fossils in the Amazon in hopes of finding a complete skeleton to match a webbed humanoid hand discovered on a previous mission. The hand is said to be a link between land and sea animals, which is total bullshit. If a crafty amphibious humanoid were the link between land a sea animals, the evolution of life would have to be caught in some weird time loop, connecting and overlapping species across hundreds of millions of years (which would actually be pretty cool). If such a creature existed it wouldn’t be a link at all, but a completely separate strand of evolution tracing back to a distant common ancestor, something like a fish with a taste for land-dwelling insects. Despite the obvious differences these separate evolutionary paths would create between the Gill-Man and humans, the monster in the film is sexually attracted to female humans, which makes no sense. Also, he seems to have evolved as an individual, which is impossible. Where was the Gill-Man’s family? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Post: Spout Mavens Disc #14, Part 11 of 13: Shorts! Volume 3 - Pretty Dead Girl (2003)

Wed, 10 Sep 2008 06:04:56 GMT

Post By: rik_tod
Post To: The Cinema 4 Pylon: SpOutpost
Post Date: 9/10/2008 2:04:56 AM
Body: Director: Shawn KuUS, 22 minutes, colorCinema 4 Rating: 5Despite a title sure to be at least partially tempting to any horror nut, Pretty Dead Girl: A Musical Necromance turns out to be rather tame. And if you could get the subject of necrophilia past the initial tsk-tsking of your grandma, there is a good chance that she would end up at film’s end thinking the movie was rather sad and sweet, and would hardly take offense at all to what is being suggested by its potentially creepy premise.I first saw Pretty Dead Girl on some cable network sometime about a year ago. I am not sure if it was Sundance or IFC, but honestly, I mix those channels up so much that I am never able to check out any of their shows regularly. Of course, most of the shows I have seen on there are of the variety about which I don’t give a rat’s ass, except for the ones done by Henry Rollins and Jon Favreau, but honestly, even thinking really hard, I can’t remember which one of the channels, Sundance or IFC, either show was actually on. I keep wanting to check out Live from Abbey Road – which is also on one of them -- but every time I flick over to it because someone I like – Muse, for instance – is on there, I end up having to sit through someone deplorable, like Josh Groban, Big and Rich or some Idol failure, to get to the good stuff, all of which seems to be interspersed with the horrendous. Can’t they just concentrate on one artist for a show? And one of these channels shows a bunch of '70s horror flicks on Friday nights -- all of which I already own, but it's nice to have them at one's fingertips anyway -- and one of them shows a lot of Japanese samurai and gangster films from the ‘50s and ‘60s, so they have that going for them. Whichever channel they are.What does this have to do with Pretty Dead Girl? Well, nothing at all, but -– Hey! Maybe I saw this on one of the Showtime networks instead? All I know is that I had Pretty Dead Girl on my DVR queue for a good long while, meaning to show it to Jen, who has some measured interest in musical films, and musical theatre in general. I watched it and enjoyed it, whatever channel it was on, though I wasn’t blown away it by it. This possibly had something to do with the musical episode from Buffy, titled Once More With Feeling, and how it seems, in my head at least, that any attempt to music up the horror or sci-fi genres should actually run through Mr. Whedon first. (Oh, if only Firefly had made it to that style of episode…) We are now in an age where, every time one turns around, it seems that another classic horror or science fiction film is being adapted into a musical (or opera – big difference there…) onstage. (Plan 9 from Outer Space, The Evil Dead, Carrie, Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Fly, etc.) Or, at least the notion gets raised that such-and-such (say, Chainsaw) would make a swell musical. I don’t know why things are trending this way – perhaps because the horror genre itself has gotten more and more trapped in its current torture porn rut – but outside of an almost rubbernecking interest I have towards these things, since I like both musicals and horror films, I actually start to despise the gimmick after a short while. And then it affects my attitude when confronted with mildly ambitious little films like Pretty Dead Girl.It’s not a fair comparison, though, because Pretty Dead Girl is not really in the horror genre; it merely teases the viewer with promises of sick glory via its title. Honestly, once I realized it was a musical, I started to imagine a remake of Return of the Living Dead 3 with that hot little zombie chick played to pierced goth glory by a smokin' Mindy Clarke. Now, that would be highly interesting (and also make RotLD3 a much better overall film.) Pretty Dead Girl doesn't even get near such possibilities, centering itself on all-out romantic tragedy instead. All told, it is no more offensive than any number of other Romeo and Juliet-style stories, where suicide is playfully dangled in the air due to the hopelessness of the romance. The title, though, implies so much more beyond a simple desperate love affair that it really is disappointing to see that all told, Pretty Dead Girl is nothing more than magic potion fluff, with a bottle of poison bringing on the appearance of suicide, but only if every single drop is gulped down the gullet (hence the magic part). Otherwise, it becomes a full-on suicide. That this storyline springs forth from the actions of a morgue techie (with a clearly misguided missile) who cavorts and dances about (always in a G-rated way) with the bodies of deceased hotties does make it seem potentially horrific at first, and one almost can’t wait for the film to go all Re-Animator on us and suddenly we shall find torrents of blood gushing from the stumps from where the limbs of unsuspecting doctors have been ripped, and there shall then commence a rising bout of rampant cannibalism in the halls of the hospital, syringes stuck through eyeballs of screaming nurses, zombie fetuses that devour their mothers from the inside out, and, perhaps worst of all, an Alaskan governor will then get dangerously close to the White House. And then only one of those things happens… and it’s not even in the movie.Unlike most of the examples listed two paragraphs above, the musical part in Pretty Dead Girl is not the gimmick. Instead, it is the false trappings of horror that are the actual gimmick, and it almost seems like a gimmick which has only been employed to get people to watch the film who are ultimately going to be disappointed once the film doesn’t follow through on its sick promise. It certainly tricked me into watching it the first time. And instead of where I thought it was going, I got a nice – just nice – little musical instead, with a couple of catchy tunes (I have had that “I have waited more than the better of my life” melody ear-worming me for the past couple of weeks since I started watching the film again), a lot of leggy dames hoofin’ it in a dream sequence, a trio of well-turned (and well cast) performances in the main roles and… well, that’s about it. It doesn’t go beyond that for me. It’s good, it's pleasant, and then I forget about it.When I first saved it on my DVR to show Jen, I never followed through. A couple of months later, as it sat there unwatched, I finally deleted it after convincing myself that she really wouldn’t think that much of it. And then I forgot about it until I received the Shorts! Volume 3 collection from Spout Mavens. Now, with DVD in hand, I have once more sidled up to the “should I show it to her?” stage, and already I am convincing myself to the negative impulse again of not even showing it to her. The problem here is one of too much familiarity with the genre. The more experience or expertise one has in a certain genre, the more lesser items in that genre start to give way almost immediately to feelings of ennui. At least, that’s the way it normally works. I know some people that are horror nuts – some even on this very website -- who unabashedly adore every single horror movie that comes out, practically carving little gory hearts with dripping arrows through them into the top of their computer desk while once more giving five stars to something like Saw IV. Sure, some are better than others, but still… horror is great! Isn’t it? Aren’t all horror movies, no matter how bad, instantly awesome and cool, just because they are horror movies? Well, no. Some just blankly suck outright, and some are just downright atrocious from every conceivable angle. The same with every genre.As I have said before, at least 75 percent of everything is garbage, no matter what form of media, no matter how much there is, and into this giant slice of pie, I heap mounds of the merely average. There is another slice of percentage, a chunk that perhaps appears as a normal slice of that pie, which accounts for the merely good. And finally, there is left a much thinner slice, the remainder, that denotes that which exists in the "very good to great" range. The continued and legendary greatness of certain entries in any genre make it increasingly harder, over time, to enjoy that category’s far more noxious efforts. It is towards a target sublime to which artists, even popular artists, should aim their talents. Back to the point, because my girlfriend has a good deal of experience, and therefore opinion, regarding the musical genre, and is well versed in those films which serve as the pinnacles of the form, I know instinctively that it is going to take far more to impress her in this genre than it would, say, me.And I already think that Pretty Dead Girl is merely a good short musical film. Not fantastic, not knock your socks off, but just good. And so, for someone with the more than average eye for musicals in general, having seen the excellence which can be achieved in the genre, watching this is like seeing a dance sequence pop up in Ally McBeal. Sure, the actors might be giving it their all, but they are miles from being in the real thing. And, further discounting it for the gimmick factor of its fake fantasy horror trappings, Pretty Dead Girl can seem pretty dead from the beginning. And, if not dead, then just merely playing possum. And nicely at that.And, speaking for myself, though I liked it well enough, nice is not what most people who would be intrigued by such a title as Pretty Dead Girl are going to be expecting.

Spout Post: Arachniphobes need not apply...

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:49:43 GMT

Post By: Dr_Gor
Post To: Dr_Gor Blog
Post Date: 8/26/2008 2:49:43 PM
Body: One of the great giant monster movies of the 50's that nobody ever mentions any more was Tarantula . In the Arizona desert, a scientist (Leo G. Carroll) is working on a special growth formula that he hopes will help to feed the Earth's ever expanding population. When one of the scientist's assistants injects himself with the formula he goes mad and attacks the scientist. In the ensuing struggle one of the test subjects, a three foot long tarantula, escapes it's cage and wanders out into the desert. There is one catch, the version of the serum that the spider has been injected with causes it to keep growing exponentially. Soon it is the size of a car and attacking cattle and people. By the time the local Sherrif and the town doctor (played by the always priceless John Agar) figure out what is going on the spider is bigger than a house and still growing. By now it is not hard to find but it is also virtually unstoppable... machine gun fire and dynamite seem to have no effect. By the time the Airforce scrambles a squadron of fighter jets to battle the giant arachnid it is over 100 feet tall and heading directly towards town. This movie is a lot of fun and definately worth your time if you ever get a chance to watch it. Also, take a good look at the jet squadron leader... barely recognizable in his helmut and oxygen mask... it is none other than Clint Eastwood in an uncredited role! Clint also appeared briefly, and again uncredited, in Revenge of The Creature , the sequel to Creature From The Black Lagoon , as a young lab technician. I think this may have been his first movie role. < GOR >

Spout Post: Re:Weekly Theme for August 25: Monster Madness

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:38:35 GMT

Post By: Dr_Gor
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/26/2008 2:38:35 PM
Body: One of the great giant monster movies of the 50's that nobody ever mentions any more was Tarantula . In the Arizona desert, a scientist (Leo G. Carroll) is working on a special growth formula that he hopes will help to feed the Earth's ever expanding population. When one of the scientist's assistants injects himself with the formula he goes mad and attacks the scientist. In the ensuing struggle one of the test subjects, a three foot long tarantula, escapes it's cage and wanders out into the desert. There is one catch, the version of the serum that the spider has been injected with causes it to keep growing exponentially. Soon it is the size of a car and attacking cattle and people. By the time the local Sherrif and the town doctor (played by the always priceless John Agar) figure out what is going on the spider is bigger than a house and still growing. By now it is not hard to find but it is also virtually unstoppable... machine gun fire and dynomite seem to have no effect. By the time the Airforce scrambles a squadron of fighter jets to battle the giant arachnid it is over 100 feet tall and heading directly towards town. This movie is a lot of fun and definately worth your time if you ever get a chance to watch it. Also, take a good look at the jet squadron leader... barely recognizable in his helmut and oxygen mask... it is none other than Clint Eastwood in an uncredited role! Clint also appeared briefly, and again uncredited, in Revenge of The Creature , the sequel to Creature From The Black Lagoon , as a young lab technician. I think this may have been his first movie role. < GOR >

Spout Post: XIII: 'The Monster Squad'

Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:54:19 GMT

Post By: usesoap
Post To: Natsukashi
Post Date: 8/25/2008 2:54:19 PM
Body: The Monster Squad (1987)Directed by: Fred DekkerWritten by: Shane Black and Fred DekkerStarring: Andre Gower as Sean CrenshawRobby Kiger as PatrickBrent Chalem as Horace (The Fat Kid)Michael Faustino as Eugene Tagline: “Call them for a monster-ous good time!” By: Jason Plissken Pre-Screening Memories: I haven't seen The Monster Squad since I was in high school, but since it had “Monster” in the title, it was required viewing. I would scour the TV listings every week, checking for what creatures would be featured for the week. This one sounded like the Mother Lode, in that it featured all the classic monsters from Universal Studios: Dracula, the Wolf Man, Frankenstein's Monster, the Mummy, and the Creature from the Black Lagoon. The movie came out in 1987, but I didn't see it until it came on HBO about a year later. My memories of the film are pretty vague but I did learn a number of things from watching it: I remember the movie was corny but still able to keep my attention. There were several little details about the kids in the film that I wanted for my childhood: to battle monsters as a young kid, a really cool treehouse (that was two-story, no less!), and a neighborhood girl like Patrick's sister (played by Lisa Fuller, which was really the height of her film career, unless you count Teen Witch). I thought that it was really cool that the main character, Sean Krenshaw (played by Andre Gower), was able to watch a nearby drive-in movie from his roof. I could not have cared less if I could not hear the dialogue, just watching it would have been enough to occupy me. I could do the whole Mystery Science Theater 3000 thing, I suppose, and make up my own dialogue. I remember Fat Kid declaring that the "Wolf man had nards." Childish, I know, but 'nards' is just a funny word. It was the first time I heard sex referred to as "dorking."Again, I was a kid, these things were endlessly fascinating to me. I remember a World War II bomber loaded with Dracula's coffin in thebeginning. At the time, it seemed perfectly plausible for the ancient tomb of Nosferatu to circle over middle America for no apparent reason whatsoever. I remember having a fondness for the film in the way it handled its leads, not treating them as typical “Hollywood” kids, in much the same way that “Stand By Me” and “The Goonies” seemed to. They never seemed to talk down to their targeted audience. Will the exclusive “Monster Squad” still allow membership to Jason now that he's an old guy? Find out in the podcast here: download it here.

Spout Post: Re:Scarred for Life - Salvador Dali and Luis Bunuel do me in...

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:03:46 GMT

Post By: lopezdash
Post To: Filmgaming
Post Date: 6/9/2008 4:03:46 PM
Body: [quote user="mercurial"] Growing up on the California coast had an immensely adverse effect on me as a child, especially the fact that I had an older brother that despised my very birth. At the age of 7 he exposed me to Jaws and used his gargantuan older-brother hands to keep me planted on the couch to view the film despite my repeated attempts at escaping the horror on screen. I have no recollection of going into the ocean before this but vividly recall every attempt thereafter. When my family’s weekly Sunday brunches in Carmel, CA culminated in a walk to the beaches of the coast, I remember bursting into tears and crying until my parents allowed me to stay isolated in the backseat of the family station wagon. Approximately 28 months later my father felt compelled to break me of my fear and drag me 1 ½ miles from the coast into the sea and leave me alone to “break” me of my fear. I was subsequently dragged into the undertow after an hour of dog-paddling and taken further out from sea where I was subsequently rescued by a lifeguard and given CPR back on the shore. I didn’t talk to my father for about a year afterward. From that point on I have been unable to enter any body of water alone and only have nightmares of Great White Sharks attacking me. A little more than 200 words but had to explain it all. Hopefully it still counts. [/quote] Oh, wow! That's funny though. I grew up outside of LA and have always felt safer swimming in the ocean. For some reason, I am more frightened of swimming in a lake. I'm convinced there's a monster of some sort living in lakes, and they're very mad because fo the limited space available for swimming.

Spout Post: Book Vs. Film: The Shrinking Man, Incredible or Just Short?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 04:32:07 GMT

Post By: TheWorkingDead
Post To: The Film Library
Post Date: 1/15/2008 11:32:07 PM
Body: A continuation/distillation of a recent blog post. I recently read Richard Matheson's novel The Shrinking Man, and although Matheson is recognizable to anyone who's seen a Twilight Zone episode or watched many classic horror movies, this is the first book of his I'd read. I chose it for two very simple reasons. The Incredible Shrinking Man is one of my all time favorite films(release it on DVD, PLEASE!!), and the cover had a guy being menaced by a giant spider. The adolescent in me is always intrigued by giant spiders.The movie actually stays pretty close to the book, and the alterations are mainly cosmetic. The book utilizes alternating timeline, juxtaposing Scott Carey's tribulations as he's isolated and trapped in his basement, under an inch in height with earlier days where he was just beginning to shrink and still coexisting with his wife. Eventually these two timelines merge as, near the end of the book, we find out how Scott became trapped in the basement in the first place.The movie makes things much more linear, but still manages to keep most of the events intact.Jack Arnold(who directed another favorite, The Creature From The Black Lagoon) helmed the film version, and added the hyperbolic Incredible to the title(in all fairness it's unlikely that that was actually Arnold's decision). Aside from some stellar forced perspective and rear projection effects, the movie keeps up a pretty good pace, and keeps the tension on for most of it's running time. The only other notable change in memory comes at the end of the film.*Pretty Big Spoilers Ahead*Throughout the novel and movie, Scott Carey operates under the assumption that in 7 days he will cease to exist(his shrinking is very steady, and he has it pinpointed when he will shrink out of existence). A lot of drama is wrenched from his uncertainty as to why he keeps fighting to live, instead of give in and die when he knows the end is so near anyway. On the seventh day he awakes to find himself in a completely alien world with colors and shapes completely unfamiliar to him. He slowly realizes that he's shrunk to the point that he has slipped in between the cracks in most objects, and the book(and film) ends on an oddly optimistic note, with Scott deciding to keep living, and explore the smaller worlds and uncharted forms of life in the universe as he shrinks further and further through reality. The book's final coda is 'In Nature there is no zero!' while the movie changes that to become 'to god there is no zero!' A small alteration, to be sure, but it brings with it a pretty notable tonal shift.*End Spoilers* Apparently IMDB has listed a remake in pre-production, which I won't dismiss outright, although I'm not exactly excited to see it. It's being written by the people behind the Madagascar and a few other CG movies, which means we might get an animated version of this film. Certainly the look will be more eye-popping, but it remains to be seen if the new version will be as emotionally satisfying.

Spout Post: Re: Really Cheesy (a.k.a. Drive-In) Horror Movies

Thu, 31 May 2007 09:44:23 GMT

Post By: LateNighter
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 5/31/2007 5:44:23 AM
Body: [quote user="divinemsjunebug"]I absolutely LOVE Cheesey B movies. Especially watching old Mystery Science Theater 3000 movies, they say everything that I want to say. There are just so many fun movies with bad monster costumes and really bad acting and lots of bimbo women with pointy boobs. They consider Creature from the Black Lagoon kind of a B movie, but I really think it's pretty good. Also movies like Santa Clause vs the Martians, The Screaming Skull, Attack of the 50 Foot Woman, Attack of the Puppet People, Revenge of the Creature, Oh and Jesse James Meets Frankensteins Daughter, The Deadly Mantis, The Brain that Wouldn't Die...I can think of a MILLION of them. They are just such hilarious, Fun Movies...My friends and I have a B Movie night every once in a while (we usually turn it into some kind of drinking game or something like that to really liven it up)...[/quote] Is MST3K still on, June? I haven't seen it in ages. Also, I haven't seen all of the movies you listed, but I consider Creature from the Black Lagoon and Attack of the 50 Foot Woman to be true classics! Another one the MST gang used to laugh at, but is one of my all-time favorites, is Teenagers from Outer Space. Have you ever seen it? (Although, I'm going off-topic here, am I not? Sorry!)

Spout Post: Re: Really Cheesy (a.k.a. Drive-In) Horror Movies

Thu, 31 May 2007 04:33:01 GMT

Post By: divinemsjunebug
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 5/31/2007 12:33:01 AM
Body: I absolutely LOVE Cheesey B movies. Especially watching old Mystery Science Theater 3000 movies, they say everything that I want to say. There are just so many fun movies with bad monster costumes and really bad acting and lots of bimbo women with pointy boobs. They consider Creature from the Black Lagoon kind of a B movie, but I really think it's pretty good. Also movies like Santa Clause vs the Martians, The Screaming Skull, Attack of the 50 Foot Woman, Attack of the Puppet People, Revenge of the Creature, Oh and Jesse James Meets Frankensteins Daughter, The Deadly Mantis, The Brain that Wouldn't Die...I can think of a MILLION of them. They are just such hilarious, Fun Movies...My friends and I have a B Movie night every once in a while (we usually turn it into some kind of drinking game or something like that to really liven it up)...

Spout Tag:love

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT

love
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1480

Spout Tag:Classic

Sat, 19 Dec 2009 23:30:46 GMT

Classic
Number of films tagged: 816

Number of people who tagged: 313

Number of times used: 1454

Spout Tag:escape

Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:51:44 GMT

escape
Number of films tagged: 2868

Number of people who tagged: 76

Number of times used: 279

Spout Tag:kidnapping

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 05:39:42 GMT

kidnapping
Number of films tagged: 2851

Number of people who tagged: 49

Number of times used: 172

Spout Tag:monster

Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:22:02 GMT

monster
Number of films tagged: 1143

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 95

Spout Tag:rescue

Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:36 GMT

rescue
Number of films tagged: 4080

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 142

Spout Tag:scientist

Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:47:27 GMT

scientist
Number of films tagged: 1408

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 77

Spout Tag:charming

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:29:19 GMT

charming
Number of films tagged: 46

Number of people who tagged: 30

Number of times used: 57

Spout Tag:mutant

Wed, 27 May 2009 13:02:10 GMT

mutant
Number of films tagged: 452

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 28

Spout Tag:3-D

Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:16:35 GMT

3-D
Number of films tagged: 28

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 33

Spout Tag:amazon

Tue, 12 May 2009 13:09:30 GMT

amazon
Number of films tagged: 127

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 8

Spout Tag:verve

Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:24:28 GMT

verve
Number of films tagged: 111

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 115

Spout Tag:seamonster

Thu, 18 Dec 2008 14:05:08 GMT

seamonster
Number of films tagged: 100

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

Spout Tag:humanoid

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:05:40 GMT

humanoid
Number of films tagged: 20

Number of people who tagged: 0

Number of times used: 0