London After Midnight redux
craig
LONG :-)
Matt Barry
"craig" <sle...@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:2b98fd0d-8867-484f...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Probably nothing but.....
> LONG :-)
>
> http://thehorrordrunx.yuku.com/topic/753
I couldn't even get it through that one. Mike Gebert's "London After
Midnight" page was much funnier. Is that still online? I'd love to read that
again.
--
Matt Barry
View my films at: www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
Read my blog at: http://filmreel.blogspot.com
sir m
I agree..... I treated it as fiction and did not enjoy the reading
Matt Barry
"sir m" <mccr...@adam.com.au> wrote in message
news:97d12db1-f370-40ac...@q28g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
I went back and picked up where I left off, reading it through to the end,
and found it very irresponsible to list phone numbers of hard-working
archivists and preservationists who are now no doubt going to be bombarded
with calls about this hoax taking their time away from more important work.
The lengths some people will go for attention.
steve
The Gebert page
mikeg...@gmail.com
> Midnight" page was much funnier. Is that still online? I'd love to read that
> again.
Yeah, it moved slightly, but here it is in all its Web circa 1999
glory (some of which was intentionally crude, no really):
Matt Barry
<mikeg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b1771f30-647b-40ea...@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
I posted your link to the forum where the original message was announced.
Incidentally, the whole hoax is spreading quite a bit. Several "news"
sources have already ran an interview with the original poster. When I
attempted to explain on the message board that this is obviously a hoax, I
was told that there's all sorts of "evidence" out there now.
Stacia
> I couldn't even get it through that one. Mike Gebert's "London After
> Midnight" page was much funnier. Is that still online? I'd love to read that
> again.
I think this guy even used Mike Gebert's mock-up of the title of the
film.
I've seen a similar write-up before, so I'm sure this is the same
person responsible. It was on a webpage, if I recall. That was years
ago, I can't imagine why they keep posting it.
Stacia
Lloyd Fonvielle
It's just because the missing footage from "Metropolis" and from "The
Magnificent Ambersons" was recently discovered -- people think they can
plausibly pull a fast one about other lost treasures.
Mar de Cortes Baja
www.mardecortesbaja.com <http://www.mardecortesbaja.com/blog>
R H Draney
>
>It's just because the missing footage from "Metropolis" and from "The
>Magnificent Ambersons" was recently discovered -- people think they can
>plausibly pull a fast one about other lost treasures.
ObCryingWolf: three things nobody will believe even if someday they *do* turn
out to be true:
1. Abe Vigoda died.
2. You've got a whole boatload of Nigerian money coming your way.
3. A complete print of LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT has been found.
....r
--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.
dbf
who is friends with Sid and he told me Sid is not a hoaxer....
It is possible his story is true - otherwise, this is his passionate
attempt to get awareness of the hunt out there in the public, which is
essential in finding lost.misplaced films.
The headline "LAM FOUND!" is a bit annoying - it is NOT found yet.
Anyhow, it would be nice if it shows up! *knock on wood*
Donald4564
Perhaps we should not give up hope? When one considers that in the
21st Century we thought it was out of time for any more lost silents
to be found - but here we are at the end of the first decade nearly
and "Beyond the Rocks" has shown up and recently there have been the
missing bits to "Metropolis".
Regards
Silents Please
Donald Binks
dbf
"found" the film, he was a kid and it was the late 80s...no internet, no
DVDs, no huge satellite oldies film channels - in those days, there was
a much bigger barrier in communication to the big studios over these
kinds of things. If he called up people at facilities, most would
probably dismiss him and not bother to check. I can see myself doing
the same thing - relabelling the can and trying to get it in the
database, but wouldn't have stolen it and honestly wouldn't have known
who to contact about it. All we had were the Yellow Pages those days!
Probably Sid realized after HorrorDrunx got Universal to make a
statement about a story they did about a lot fire, that maybe sharing
this story online could create some pressure for people to LOOK in the
right place for this film. I don't think someone who is obviously so
passionate about film, and this film in particular, would create such a
verbose, elaborate hoax.
In article
<a8e2197a-f5e3-4424...@r35g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
Matt Barry
"dbf" <spa...@spamsux.com> wrote in message
news:spamsux-F30804...@news.euronet.nl...
> Actually, I re-read the article and believe it could be true. When he
> "found" the film, he was a kid and it was the late 80s...no internet, no
> DVDs, no huge satellite oldies film channels - in those days, there was
> a much bigger barrier in communication to the big studios over these
> kinds of things. If he called up people at facilities, most would
> probably dismiss him and not bother to check. I can see myself doing
> the same thing - relabelling the can and trying to get it in the
> database, but wouldn't have stolen it and honestly wouldn't have known
> who to contact about it. All we had were the Yellow Pages those days!
>
> Probably Sid realized after HorrorDrunx got Universal to make a
> statement about a story they did about a lot fire, that maybe sharing
> this story online could create some pressure for people to LOOK in the
> right place for this film. I don't think someone who is obviously so
> passionate about film, and this film in particular, would create such a
> verbose, elaborate hoax.
>
The problem is, his story is filled with errors and inconsistencies. I
really don't feel like re-typing them, so I'll just repost the comments I
made in the forum:
The facts you cite are just further evidence of the silliness of this whole
story, which incredibly people seem to be believing! The old "London After
Midnight" hoaxes are a staple of film forums, and this one is no different.
It's simply laughable to suggest that a print "existed" in the vaults for
all these years, and despite being one of (if not *the* most) sought after
"lost" films, no one ever noticed it. Now, only ten years later, an
anonymous poster in a movie forum claims to have seen it. What nonsense.
More to the point, the idea that the film was properly cataloged after this
incident is also laughable, since clearly no one (despite the many
historians and preservationists scouring the vaults throughout the world)
ever once came across this phantom "print". The author's claims that other
archivists knew of the print and were withholding it from release until they
recovered a "missing reel" is just further nonsense without a shred of
real-world evidence.
I wouldn't normally waste my time replying to a "London After Midnight" hoax
(if I did that, I daresay I'd have grown tired of it long ago). I only am
responding to this latest hoax because the original poster has encouraged
people to call and email hardworking archivists and preservationists, and it
is a waste of their valuable time to have to wade through this nonsense. The
recent discovery of the "Metropolis" print made national news...notice that
this anonymous poster's fictional story has yet to be taken seriously by
anyone beside the most gullible.
As I suggested, if you want some fun "London After Midnight" hoax material,
read Mike Gebert's hilarious take on this bizarre phenomenon:
http://www.michaelgebert.com/lam/lam1.html
It's far more entertaining, and even has a fun twist end to it.
Until someone else comes forward with details about this phantom print, I'll
continue to call the story for what it is.
The problem is, this story has more holes than Swiss cheese. Why, if the
existence of the print was seemingly "common knowledge" among the archivists
at Turner Entertainment, did knowledge of this print never once come to
light, even after being announced as one of the top 10 most wanted missing
films by the American Film Institute? I immediately get suspicious when
people take a "why, of course" attitude toward this stuff. Sort of like a
guy I knew who not only claimed that he'd seen the infamous lost "spider
pit" scene in "King Kong", but in fact that he couldn't remember a time when
it *wasn't* in the film. Sure, it's only the other hundreds of thousands of
viewers who have missed seeing that particular copy. Pure nonsense.
Next, why haven't we *ever* heard anything from Rosalind DeWitt, the person
referred to in the story as the anonymous poster's contact at Turner? Surely
she would have known the significance of the film, especially since (from
the story) it sounds like she, or at least some other archivists, had
screened the material, by which they able to determine it was missing a
reel.
The bit about Turner owning the AMC channel makes me doubt the story even
more. They owned Turner Classic Movies (TCM). Second, they never "announced"
a screening of the film (unless we're referring to the 2002 Schmidlin
reconstruction).
The biggest proof, if further proof was even needed, that this story is pure
wishful fabrication, is the ending that states, after all these discoveries
and people who knew about the print and this and that and the other, the
film is lost again. In other words, there is absolutely no tangible evidence
to suggest that it ever surfaced. The last person we know of with any
certainty who saw the film was historian William K. Everson, who screened
the film in the 1950s, and confirmed its loss in the 1967 vault fire.
Believe me, I want the film to be rediscovered just as badly as anyone else.
I've been fascinated by stills from the film for years now. But do you
honestly believe, if a print did exist, that it wouldn't already be known by
historians and archivists like Kevin Brownlow, David Skal, Forrest Ackerman,
Rick Schmidlin and countless others who have searched for the film over the
years and are in the business of preserving silent film?
Stacia
> It's just because the missing footage from "Metropolis" and from "The
> Magnificent Ambersons" was recently discovered
Don't kid me like that, man. I had to go to Google to make sure you
were joking.
Stacia
easily trolled when it comes to Orson Welles
Lloyd Fonvielle
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Did you see this:
http://www.mardecortesbaja.com/blog/_archives/2008/4/1/3612016.html
dbf
offices in the movie business don't know about films from 60 years ago -
I love old radio shows and often read how shows turn up in an old
warehouse from a radio station because no one is bothered looking
through them. Though it is a sought-after film, it is not necessarily
in everyone's consciousness and could easily have been
mislabelled/misfiled and lost in a "Raiders of the Lost Ark"-style
warehouse. I've read a lot about "Dr Who" lost material, which continues
to pop up now and then because someone finds a mislablled can of film or
is uncovered because an archive is being sifted through or moved.
The reason the "real" news media has not grabbed onto this story is
simply because the actual film is not found and verified- "Metropolis"
had been taken to Berlin and verified by the appropriate film experts -
this is a story about WHERE it was and might be and an attempt to get
the appropriate parties to take a look. It has no place in real news
until it is really found.
I also tend to believe it a bit more because one of my best friends has
been a best friend of Sid's for over 20 years - and he really vouches
for the guy. If my friend didn't vouch, I would be a bit more skeptical
as well.
I thoroughly understand why people would think it's a hoax, though - I
just hope one way or the other, someone somewhere can use the info and
determine if the film is where Sid claims it is.
I haven't actually viewed the reconstruction yet, but have it on video -
I may wait a month or two just in case ;-)
In article <g6ckng$dgi$1...@registered.motzarella.org>,
lzcutter
just hope one way or the other, someone somewhere can use the info and
determine if the film is where Sid claims it is. >>
But part of the problem is that the film is no longer where Sid claims
it is. The films in the Jefferson vault were moved after Turner
Entertainment merged with Time-Warner back in 1996.
So, the film remains lost. The webmaster at horrordrunx's response to
all this is "Prove us wrong" which is hardly the attitude you would
expect if the story was true.
As others have noted, why find the film over 20 years ago, hold the
canisters in your hand and not tell anyone? He could have written to
any number of people about his "find". Instead he chose to stay
silent and only tell a handful of friends.
Lastly, Sid posts the story and then goes on out of town and is not
expected back until Sunday so he can't answer any of the questions
people are posting about his story.
So, people will remain skeptical until LAM is ever found.
Lynn in Sherman Oaks
Matt Barry
"lzcutter" <ly...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote in message
news:8843b264-a9d9-4b19...@h17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
The implausabilities of his story are endless. The point I keep coming back
to is that he makes it sound like knowledge of this print was "common
knowledge" among the archivists there, and that they were just waiting to
recover a "missing reel" before releasing it. Obviously, any archivist would
have known what the film was, how rare it was, etc.
The fact that he put the film back on the shelf, and it has once again
mysteriously "vanished", is just further evidence that this is all a
colossal put-on. Why didn't any of the other thousands and thousands of
film prints vanish in that time?
The fact that Sid is unwilling to stick around and follow up on his story is
further proof that it's not true.
The webmaster at HorrorDrunx deleted one of the posts I made responding to
some of these points, so he's automatically forfeited all credibility if he
feels the need to censor discussion that disagrees with his "facts".
For anyone who feels that Sid's original post was too detailed or had too
much "insider information" to be false, just remember those long, incredibly
detailed reviews of "lost films" that F. Gwynplaine MacIntire used to write.
lzcutter
Next, why haven't we *ever* heard anything from Rosalind DeWitt, the
person
referred to in the story as the anonymous poster's contact at Turner?
Surely
she would have known the significance of the film, especially since
(from
the story) it sounds like she, or at least some other archivists, had
screened the material, by which they able to determine it was missing
a
reel. >>
Matt,
I see you have been banned from horrordrunx.com for being too
skeptical about the "find". You (and a few others) were very
articulate about the numerous problems with Terror's story. I think
it says something about a website and a webmaster who responds to the
negativity by saying "Prove Us Wrong" and then bans posters that don't
agree with the story.
According to Terror's story, Ms. DeWitt died in 1993 of cancer (but
not before giving her blessing to Sid dating her daughter).
He is supposed to be returning today from his trip and it will be
interesting to see what he has to say. I wonder if he has bothered to
call or email all those preservationists that he encouraged his
readers to contact?
Matt Barry
"lzcutter" <ly...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote in message
news:7a4e91db-f231-484d...@u12g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
I'm anxiously awaiting Mr. Terror's return to the board to see whether or
not he comes forward with more information, or if he's sitting back having a
good laugh over the whole thing. I don't know Mr. Terror personally, and
many seemed to take my skepticism of his story as some of kind of personal
insult, if not outright heresy, so I assume he has some standing in the
"horror community" that I was not aware of. Regardless, I don't think we
should need to walk on eggshells just because of his reputation around that
board, and until he or anyone can tender a single shred of evidence that any
of this story happened, I will continue to voice my doubt about it while
providing facts as to why I feel that way. If this was an obvious prank or
joke, I wouldn't give it a second thought, but several members of that board
have claimed to have "announced" this find to the press.
The webmaster of that forum appears to be a ludicrously immature individual
whose only response to the numerous facts I cited was "Prove Us Wrong". I
asked him on what basis he believed this story to be true, and not just
another one of the countless "LAM" hoaxes that has permeated the web in the
last decade, and was promptly banned with a taunting message. With this
action, I feel that he has forfeited all credibility.
lzcutter
I found a reply from Ted Newsom (the guy who was working at the MGM
archive and corroborates Terror's story on Horrodrunx).
He recaps his end of the scenario about finding the listing sans
assets or vault location in the early 2000s and then ends with this:
"Further point of reference: I have told this before (and it's pretty
much the same story every time), on CHFB, on Latarnia, and on Scarlet
Street, so my end of it is pretty much in the public domain... if,
say, someone wanted to do an elaborate prequel to it and use my story
as a verification...
Yah jes' never know... "
Elaborate prequel? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!
Oh wait, not really.
Matt Barry
"lzcutter" <ly...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote in message
news:df0b1496-81ef-4c62...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
I'm not sure I understand what Ted's saying here. Is he saying that the
listing actually reads "The Hypnotist, aka London After Midnight" as per
Sid's account of it? If so, where is this listing to be found? I take the
second part of his statement to say that the listing showed no available
materials on the title, and the specific whereabouts of the print are still
uncertain?
I know I sound like a relentless skeptic, but I just feel like something
isn't adding up here. I'm not calling either of the gentlemen a "liar", but
something about the story just doesn't quite gel for me. If the print *was*
indeed there in 1988, why did it vanish, and not, say, "The Thin Man", or
"The Crowd", or "The Champ", or any of the other thousands of MGM titles? I
understand the vault contents were moved, but (as far as I know) no other
titles were "lost" during the move, were they?
Second, I still just don't understand why Sid sat on this information for so
long. This, combined with the fact that he has yet to offer any new
information since his initial post, makes me doubly skeptical. I know it
threw the moderator of "HorrorDrunx" into a frenzy when I said this on his
board, but I fail to see how Sid's decision to keep quiet about his
discovery for so long could be considered a good decision, since the print
has seemingly vanished again since then.
Finally, I have been unable to find any information on Mr. Terror, and why
he is considered something of an authority on this matter (and not just
another hoaxster desperate for attention). If anyone could fill me in on the
details, I'd appreciate it.
lzcutter
the
listing actually reads "The Hypnotist, aka London After Midnight" as
per
Sid's account of it? If so, where is this listing to be found? I take
the
second part of his statement to say that the listing showed no
available
materials on the title, and the specific whereabouts of the print are
still
Matt,
I think part of the problem is that our eyes start to glaze over at a
certain point when trying to keep all the so-called facts of this
story straight (which is never a good sign).
If I understand correctly what Ted has posted both at Horrordrunx and
at CHFB, is that he says he saw the listing "The Hypnotist aka London
After Midnight" in the old MGM database when he was working at the
Jefferson facility in the early 2000s. By then, of course, the merge
with Turner/Time Warner had taken place and the pre-1986 MGM safety
elements were moved to Time-Warner vaults. Newsom says that they had
access to the old MGM database on the laptops they were using for the
approximate year that he worked at the facility.
Also, according to him, there was a listing for the film but no assets
were mentioned nor any location info given (which would have been moot
at that point).
I emailed Dick May about the story and he pointed out to me that MGM
films still on nitrate stock after the 1967 vault fire were moved to
the Eastman House by the early 1970s. He also says that no nitrate
films were stored at Jefferson in the 1980s (which would contradict
one of Terror's main points).
It is a relatively new website (horrordrunx, that is) and they may
have put this together as a way to drive up their web traffic. Being
linked to Ain't It Cool probably escalated their numbers of views for
the weekend but it will be a fleeting victory as they won't sustain
the traffic.
Terror also says he worked with Roslind DeWitt's husband and brother-
in-law, Dewey, on "The Rose" but there are no DeWitts listed in the
imdb credits for either cast or crew.
The faithful readers of horrodrunx will likely believe the story no
matter the outcome. There is no way to convince them that Terror
wouldn't do any of this if it weren't true. I believe Michael Blake
referred to the as Kool-Aid drinkers over at the CHFB and it is an apt
description.
Its' Sunday evening but still no word from Sid and that probably says
volumes.
sir m
> "lzcutter" <l...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote in message
MCINTIRE,S reviews are certainly partly convincing and have some
merit. .I found his review of "merton of the movies" to be interesting
Matt Barry
"lzcutter" <ly...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote in message
news:0cc6be4a-735f-4585...@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
The more I hear of this story the less likely it seems, I'm afraid.
Ted's latest post to the HorrorDrunx forum states that he *didn't* see "The
Hypnotist aka London After Midnight" listing when he was at the warehouse,
but he also states that he was only there for a few days and never looked
for it! This seems like a complete contradiction of his earlier statement,
and ultimately doesn't prove anything one way or the other.
Dick May is certainly an expert whose word I am willing to accept without
much question on the matter. Thank you for posting his response to this
issue. I tried to find any information I could on any of the DeWitts
mentioned in the story, and was unable to find anything. This doesn't
necessarily prove anything, but in addition to your point that none of their
names show up in connection with "The Rose" further detracts from Sid's
story.
The "moderator" (and I use that term loosely, since there's nothing
"moderate" about him) of HorrorDrunx has continued to ban and censor anyone
who questions the story. And Sid *still* hasn't posted a single followup. I
have to conclude that the whole thing is a publicity stunt for the new
HorrorDrunx forum. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, depending on your
perspective), as the latest message has pointed out, the forum has become a
laughingstock and has already lost all its credibility by censoring posts to
such an extent. When the story was called in to question, the moderator
responded with vicious and mean-spirited taunts, hardly the kind of thing
that help his case any.
One last question that I'd really appreciate an answer to is, just who is
Sid Terror? I've never heard of him prior to this incident, yet a number of
people seem to treat his word as some sort of gospel. How do we know he's
not just sitting back and laughing at the responses? How do we know he
wasn't asked to contribute the article to HorrorDrunx as a way to boost site
views? Is he the type who might risk his credibility for the sake of helping
out a new website gain some more views? Or does he have a fun sense of humor
and posted the story in the spirit of a practical joke? A couple of people
have written to me stating that they know him personally, but have failed to
provide a reason as to why his opinion should be considered any more worthy
than anyone else's. Has he written a book that I might be able to find? Or
contributed to a documentary? Why, in other words, should we care what he
has to say on the matter?
dbf
The Undead and a lover of horror films who has had odd jobs in the movie
business. One of my best friends used to play in that band with him and
they are also very good friends to this day. I don't know Sid
personally, but have heard of him for many years (all good), and I
emailed my friend about this story. He told me Sid had told his friends
about this story in the past and said he was not the type of person at
all who would do an internet hoax for attention - of course, people and
their agendas change, so who knows, but I do trust the integrity of my
friend and his opinions. Because of this small connection, I tend to
believe the story more than I would if it was from a stranger. It's easy
for many of us to say "Why didn't you do this or that" back when you
were a kid. But like many, one thing I find annoying is this "Sid's out
of town" scenario - I'm sorry, but I go out of town all the time - there
are laptops and internet cafes. Maybe he's not "out of town" at all,
but giving the story a few days to circulate and maybe hoping someone in
the biz will be able to check for the print. I think he said pretty much
everything he can about his story and any reactions we get will be
merely rehashing. How can he possibly respond to a question like "Why is
everyone else who can confirm the discovery (that one woman) dead??"
lol....
I do think the horrodrunx moderator is a bit out of line with the
banning and deleting of skeptical posts. But a lot of the skepticism
has a very negative, confrontational tone. I prefer to be skeptically
optimistic. Regardless, it's been interesting reading.
By the way, right before the LAM, this happened=
The article that The Horror Drunx released a couple days ago regarding
PRICELESS FILM HISTORY LOST IN THE UNIVERSAL PICTURES BACKLOT FIRE THAT
STUDIO EXECUTIVES REFUSED TO MENTION PUBLICLY has now caused such an
outcry from the news media and the public that Universal was forced to
make public statements to answer us!
=======
Maybe Sid learned how the internet can be used to pressure studios to
come clean or take action, and this inspired him to share his story
now???
Stacia
> Sorry, I couldn't resist.
>
> Did you see this:
>
> http://www.mardecortesbaja.com/blog/_archives/2008/4/1/3612016.html
>
> Mar de Cortes Baja
>
> www.mardecortesbaja.com<http://www.mardecortesbaja.com/blog>
I hadn't seen it before. You seem to have a knack for the practical
joke. Is that your blog? It's wonderful!
Stacia
Lloyd Fonvielle
> On Jul 26, 5:26 am, Lloyd Fonvielle <navigareNOS...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Did you see this:
>>
>> http://www.mardecortesbaja.com/blog/_archives/2008/4/1/3612016.html
> I hadn't seen it before. You seem to have a knack for the practical
> joke. Is that your blog? It's wonderful!
Thanks. My post from 1 April the year before got many Hitchcock fans,
and a few Hitchcock scholars, in a tizz:
http://www.mardecortesbaja.com/blog/_archives/2007/4/1/2850235.html
People just never seem to note the date.
Stacia
> If I understand correctly what Ted has posted both at Horrordrunx and
> at CHFB, is that he says he saw the listing "The Hypnotist aka London
> After Midnight" in the old MGM database when he was working at the
> Jefferson facility in the early 2000s. By then, of course, the merge
> with Turner/Time Warner had taken place and the pre-1986 MGM safety
> elements were moved to Time-Warner vaults.
It makes sense that it was in the database, simply because they own
the copyright and they want the rights to the film if it's ever
found. What doesn't make sense is why they would have the film yet do
a reconstruction of it with stills. Even if it was lost in a move,
the time spent doing the reconstruction would have been better spent
finding the darn film itself.
This all reminds me of the tizzy people got in a few years ago when
TCMs online database listed LAM as an available movie. I even filled
out the little "request a film" form and asked them if they were
teasing us.
Stacia
Stacia
> The webmaster of that forum appears to be a ludicrously immature individual
> whose only response to the numerous facts I cited was "Prove Us Wrong". I
> asked him on what basis he believed this story to be true, and not just
> another one of the countless "LAM" hoaxes that has permeated the web in the
> last decade, and was promptly banned with a taunting message. With this
> action, I feel that he has forfeited all credibility.
All of the regulars there seem rather immature, at least those
involved in the thread. Some of them are unable to compose a coherent
post, and most of them simply don't know enough about archival, films,
or specifically "London After Midnight" to realize how ridiculous
their protestations sound.
I suspect they had no idea of the history of the search for LAM.
They just ran with this convoluted story, thinking nothing more than
"we scooped everyone about a famous lost film," and are now paying the
price. If this was a publicity stunt, it backfired. All the
moderator and his two little minions can muster is "go away". What a
pathetic little forum.
Stacia
Lookingglass
"dbf" <spa...@spamsux.com> wrote
>
> Maybe Sid learned how the internet can be used to pressure studios to
> come clean or take action, and this inspired him to share his story
> now???
BAD press is GOOD press. It's a brave new world.
stayc...@aol.com
Being a HUGE Chaney fan, I was attracted to the story and then after
reading posts on the horrordrunx forum decided to check out this page
for further insight on the matter.
I can see how the attitude of the some of the "drunx" is off-putting
but I don't think that it should necessarily discount Mr. Terror's
story, of course, I have a what may be considered hopelessly fantastic
imagination; I believe in the unbelievable.
Maybe, just maybe, there’s a chance that these punks have stumbled
across something. *crossing fingers*
Sure, they boast drunkenness, and many have a downright terrible
attitude, but after doing a bit of research, it seems that for the
most part, in spite of their sometimes-juvenile behavior, many of them
seem to have a true love for horror and the classics. As someone
mentioned earlier, they posted an article asking for further
explanation after the studio fires, and also I noticed that they come
down on hacks like Elvira in defense of Maila Nurmi, they ran
fundraisers and memorials for Nurmi as well, they sought help for
actor Robert Quarry, they've taken a stand against animal abuse, and
against the remake of many wonderful classics, etc.
I bring all this up, because I want to point out that in spite of
their rough attitudes, they seem to be very well intentioned, and the
fanciful side of me really wants to believe that this Terror character
is telling the truth. Stranger things have happened. ...
Stacia
> they ran
> fundraisers and memorials for Nurmi as well, they sought help for
> actor Robert Quarry, they've taken a stand against animal abuse, and
> against the remake of many wonderful classics, etc.
I checked the forums again -- they seem to have only been around for
a couple of months. Am I missing something?
Stacia
stayc...@aol.com
I found that they originated a few years ago as a myspace group. It
sort of seems to have spread to many "state" chapters. If you view
past blogs, and bulletins you can sort of see what they're trying to
do. Of course it doesnt come off great because on the surface they
seem to mostly be about drinking, drinking games, and ranting about
how terrible Rob Zombie is. Ultimately though, after digging around a
bit to try to check the validity, they seemed to try to be pretty well
intentioned and not the type to make up this hoax. I sort of believe
that Mr. Terror Believes this to have happened, and so does the rest
of the group.
Stacia
> Probably nothing but.....
> LONG :-)
>
> http://thehorrordrunx.yuku.com/topic/753
Well, I went back to see if that Sid guy had showed up, and
discovered that someone had contacted UCLA to ask if they had LAM.
Then the moderator told the poor guy -- who had already bothered UCLA
on what must be their 1,000th request to "just make sure" -- that he
didn't believe him. The mod honestly said that they should all keep
pestering archivists and historians "until they have no choice but to
look high and low for it."
Right. It's the most sought-after lost film ever, so famous that
TCM funded a reconstruction of it out of stills, and historians just
haven't looked hard enough.
Like I said, these guys have NO idea about the history of LAM, and
are just making themselves look foolish. The whole site is a joke.
The last time I went there, the thread had 14 pages of comments. It's
now down to 12 because so many posts were deleted.
Stacia
lzcutter
a couple of the facts and Sid is now saying that Ted Newsom tried to
steal his story and make it his own.
Considering that, according to Dick May and others, that Turner never
had any MGM nitrate titles stored at the Jefferson/Bond Film Services
facility, all those phone calls to UCLA Film and TV Archives are for
naught and only making it harder for the staff there to do their jobs.
Sid has also now copyrighted the story and has posted it on another
website after removing any mention of Ted Newsom.
Add to that the deletion of any posts at horrordrunx that does not
support the party line and you have the makings of a melt down in
progress.
sir m
IS "London after midnight"a great film ? Based on my viewing of the
reconstructed version, I have doubts. I think that it is likely an
excellent movie and many viewers would be left with anticapations not
met
Stacia
> On Jul 30, 8:24 am, lzcutter <l...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote:
>
> > They also deleted a post from Ted Newsom where he called into question
> > a couple of the facts and Sid is now saying that Ted Newsom tried to
> > steal his story and make it his own.
I saw that his posts were deleted, but I unfortunately didn't get to
see them before they were removed. All I saw was Sid's replacement
text, where he tried to lay all the blame on Newsom.
> > Considering that, according to Dick May and others, that Turner never
> > had any MGM nitrate titles stored at the Jefferson/Bond Film Services
> > facility, all those phone calls to UCLA Film and TV Archives are for
> > naught and only making it harder for the staff there to do their jobs.
That right there led me to actually blog about this today. I was
hopping mad when I saw people in the forums had contacted UCLA and
other places about this stupid story.
> IS "London after midnight"a great film ? Based on my viewing of the
> reconstructed version, I have doubts.
I also have doubts. The plot in the remake of "Mark of the Vampire"
is awfully thin, and there's nothing to indicate LAM doesn't have that
same problem. They both seem to be showcase films for the stars
Chaney or Lugosi and not much more. There are other films I'd like to
find before LAM.
Stacia
dbf
deleted, given the moderators' stance on anyone questioning facts.
Ted was saying he thought the post deletion was not a good idea and also
pointed to a few flaws in the story, not in a dismissive way, but more
in a neutral "could be true/maybe not" manner. He did point out that ST
claims to be the great-grandson of Max Schreck, but that MS actually
didn't have any children so that is very unlikely, and could be
considered a lie - so "consider the source"......
Unfortunately, the more juvenile ST and the Horrdrunx become with their
"rebuttals" and post deletions, the less anyone who could make a
difference will take them seriously. Some will find that fine, but I
would prefer the facts be checked rather than dismissed. I actually
lean towards belief, but fear the manner in which ST is discussing this
story is working against what he wants to happen.
In article
<b0b535d4-4912-437f...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
William Hooper
> "rebuttals" and post deletions, the less anyone who could make a
> difference will take them seriously. Some will find that fine, but I
> would prefer the facts be checked rather than dismissed. I actually
> lean towards belief, but fear the manner in which ST is discussing this
> story is working against what he wants to happen.
Unfortunately, the serious research and accuracy personality types
which are attracted to a.m.s. are easy to get lured into and engaged
by this behavior, which does not have as its motivation or goal the
same things that almost all a.m.s.'ers typically do.
The thing over at horrordrunx is about self-romanticization, not
accuracy.
Lookingglass
"Stacia" <glitte...@gmail.com> wrote
But LAM is one of those *special* films. A film that has Chaney in it, for
one. It displays his knack for creating distinct make-up and character. He
plays two roles. It is in the *gothic* horror genre which in and of itself
is always and endlessly fascinating.
It may not be a "great" film...but it IS special.
Stacia
> Unfortunately, the serious research and accuracy personality types
> which are attracted to a.m.s. are easy to get lured into and engaged
> by this behavior,
Doubtful. I didn't see any AMSers lured in (unless you count my
blog entry). I did see a lot of smaller blogs entertain the idea that
LAM exists and Turner/Warner Bros has just lost the print -- which is
what Sid Terror claims -- and between that and the encouragement to
bother archivists about this nonsense, I felt compelled to say
something. People should not be giving this guy any credit,
especially given his lies about who he is and what he's done in the
past. Everything he said was either a mistake, a lie, or
unverifiable.
Stacia
StormChaser
> > I emailed Dick May about the story and he pointed out to me that MGM
> > films still on nitrate stock after the 1967 vault fire were moved to
> > the Eastman House by the early 1970s. He also says that no nitrate
> > films were stored at Jefferson in the 1980s (which would contradict
> > one of Terror's main points).
Perhaps an abandoned salt mine, somewhere?
So much attention is paid to LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT
when THE MIRACLE MAN goes wanting.
I once proposed a film re-enactment (as accurate as is possible)
with the surviving footage inserted in the proper areas.
Personally, I found the ape make-up in A BLIND BARGAIN
more terrifying than the vampire in LAM.
Stills survive from that movie to partially fill a popular book
produced a few years ago.
William Hooper
> On Jul 30, 4:06 am, William Hooper <rotoflexSPAMT...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, the serious research and accuracy personality types
> > which are attracted to a.m.s. are easy to get lured into and engaged
> > by this behavior,
>
> Doubtful. I didn't see any AMSers lured in (unless you count my
> blog entry).
You may misunderstand what was meant by engaged. I referred to the
now 44 posts on this subject in alt.movies.silent. Whether it was
initially Intentional or not, they've trolled many folks here and on
their message board.
It is interesting watching classic social identity theory precepts
being illustrated in the thread over at horrordrunx. After an
enjoyable idea is brought up by a group member, the group embraces it,
the idea is shown to be flawed, the group defends itself instead of
examining the flaws, and those who threaten the group by disproving
its ideas are reviled and held up as being wrong because they do not
adhere to the groups ideas.
It's even gotten to the point that to maintain deniability to
themselves, they demand negative proofs:
"if there are people who know where this lost/misplaced film is, let
the public know."
It's not an investigation, it's a self-romanticizing thing to define
the social group: "We are the only ones who know the TRUTH about
(flying saucer, trilateral commission, LAM)" which this post sums up
well:
"This article isnt hurting anyone. If you personally think its a hoax,
leave it be..dont respond, dont do anything. Why are you still here?
It boggles my mind, if some of these new posters think its absurd, why
are they posting here so much. This shouldnt effect you at all if you
dont believe in it. I hope the article lights a fire under more
peoples' asses, though, and they start to get up and do something
about it. Again...what would it hurt?"
The need to evade embarassment due to disproval of an unfounded
statement that has had heavy emotional and social investment made in
it is underway:
"And if I hear that over used, often repeated, stale statement again,
"His story has more holes in it than swiss cheese," I'm going to
scream.
Please save it. Really. B-O-R-I-N-G.
And please my fellow Horror Drunx...can we go forward now? "
It's not about finding out anything, it's about self-romanticization,
supported by a group, and protecting the group that enables the
unsupportable ideas.
Sid Terror
I am the Sid Terror that all this hyperbole is about. Yes, I exist.
And despite some fairly nasty things that have been said about me, my
motives, and my general character roundabout the interwebs regarding
my LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT article, I do in fact come in peace.
Firstly, I want to insure everyone that no the article is not a hoax,
a joke, a conspiracy to get web site hits, or a publicity stunt of
some kind. It is the truth as I know it and experienced it. I'm far
too serious and committed about the subject to play fast and loose
with the truth or consider concocting such a scam. Unfortunately
people have perpetuated hoaxes in the past and though I believe them
to have mostly been in the spirit of fun, they certainly didn't do us
any favors when it came time for this article. Those hoaxes set this
up to be kind of like "the boy who cried wolf" story revisited, but
now that there really is a wolf in the house people tend to be
disbelieving.
I also seriously didn't want my name to be at the forefront of this,
because with all the talk that has been funneled toward myself, I'm
afraid that people are getting distracted from the article and its
very important information. This is about LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT, not
me. I have found a lot of the personal attention a bit embarrassing
and at times exasperating, but a name HAD to be put on the article.
Yes, I admit that having to leave Los Angeles when I did, right after
posting the article was the... WORST. POSSIBLE. TIMING. Once the genie
was out of the bottle though, it couldn't be put back in. The trip
couldn't be avoided, it was a family emergency. If that is at all
doubted, the board member here with the screen name DBF apparently has
the phone number of our "mutual friend" whom I also saw while I was
out of town, so feel free to double check it.
As has been said earlier in this thread, although The Horror Drunx
organization has been around for 7 years now, the www.ThHorrorDrunx.com
web site was barely a month old when this story broke. I know that
some people bumped heads with some of the HD staff on the site and all
I can say is that they are people who were new to being moderators and
even though I tried to prepare them, they had no idea what was in
store when the flood came in. I'm not going to apologize for anyone
else's behavior because it isn't my place to, but I will say that THEY
know and admit they blew it in the PR department. Some of the worst
offenders were relieved of their moderator duties because of it, and
now we have some much more, well, "moderate" and seasoned moderators
in their place. For others it was a crash course in what NOT to do and
they came out of it having learned from their mistakes. As I can't
apologize for other people and their comments because it isn't my
place, I hope that you won't lump me and my article in with the
guilty. I was, after all, out of town for that first four frantic
days.
That said, and I am not doubting the word of any specific person here,
I have seen the record of who was banned from the site and why. This
has been greatly exaggerated by people for questionable reasons.
Everyone who is saying they were banned, simply were not. Other than
one person who spammed the board with pornography and murder crime
photos (does anyone argue they should have been banned?) and another
person who was impersonating one of our board members (which is
against the terms of service) and a third who apparently lied then
flip-flopped on his story when interviewed for my article, only three
people were banned. Just 3. Out of well over 30,000 hits on the
board, that equals only one person in 10,000+ visitors, which is
pretty acceptable for such a heated issue. If someone was banned (and
I have read the notes on this) they were either making threats, being
harassing, or otherwise being so repeatedly disruptive to the board
with their attitude that the moderators had no other choice. When you
visit someone's home you show respect, you don't put your muddy boots
on their couch and expect to be wanted back any time soon.
Frankly, I came back to a real ::beep:: storm that I had to get a
handle on. I think that the record shows I resisted and avoided any
urges to get into a flame war with people other than saying a very
general and non-direct "kizzmiazz" once. I never got into it with
anybody one on one, because I have better sense than that and knew it
would detract from what I consider the all important issue... LONDON
AFTER MIDNIGHT.
Because of that I will continue to avoid engaging hostile people in
one on one flame fests. We are all adults and don't need to stoop to
that level in order to get our points across.
To help reach those ends, the folders have now been divided into two
areas... One for the article, important data, and updates, with the
other area reserved for general comments and conversations on the
topic. It is all in an attempt to try and keep all important info in
one place think tank style and to try to stay on the topic of AGAIN re-
finding this historic film.
At this point, now that people have cooled down, I would like to
extend my hand to anyone who would like to return to the boards. Just
like anyplace else, general snarkyness and character assassination
won't be smiled on, but reasonable and productive conversation that is
directed toward the positive is more than invited.
Those that had their fingers burned and don't wish to return, it is
completely your choice and we won't disagree with you. Just consider
that The Horror Drunx organization has done a lot of good in the
horror community and we plan on continuing to make great strides in
that direction in the future. The HD way of doing things is admittedly
a bit new and out of the norm, but as activists for the Horror film
genre, they are motivated, single minded, and have the best of
intentions at heart.
Join them in that stance.
Sincere thanks,
Sid Terror
The Horror Drunx: Hollywood chapter
William Hooper
> Probably nothing but.....
> LONG :-)
>
> http://thehorrordrunx.yuku.com/topic/753
Wow, absolutely by the textbook. The 16 or so pages of discussion
have been removed, and the page has been locked with nothing on it but
the original post and supplementary posts from the author.
dbf
<f7a00c95-bfb5-41f8...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
If that is at all
> doubted, the board member here with the screen name DBF apparently has
> the phone number of our "mutual friend" whom I also saw while I was
> out of town, so feel free to double check it.
Well, I'm not a regular contributor to this particular board, so I don't
know my vouching will make much difference to the nay-sayers. Your
explanation is solid and if people don't believe it, that's their right,
I suppose.
I believe the story anyway, and hope something positive can come out of
it. What's interesting to see is how emotional people are about this
film. Some seem so scared of being disappointed (again) that they
refuse to accept even the possibility that it could be true- some become
very angry and confrontational.
It seems that if the error is indeed due to misfiling, mislabeling
and/or human error, nothing short of a manual can-by-can search for the
film will turn up anything. Anyone who's worked with transferring
databases over the years will know how easy it is to lose info in the
process.
I have no doubt that such a high-profile film exists *somewhere* in the
world - it will turn up someday.
Anyway, Sid, good luck with it and I hope you can keep us up to date
with any efforts that are in progress, even if they turn up empty. The
easiest way for films to remain "lost" is when people stop caring or
looking.
Sid Terror
No, it was split into two folders. One folder with the article and
important info (so people gone have to look through several pages for
it) and the other folder linked from the first, for discussion. All
the "16 or so pages" are there. Just as I said. So, I don't know
which textbook you are reading, but there seem to be some typos. ;)
Sid Terror
either. ;D
Features @ LFP.com
> "lzcutter" <l...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote in message
> > I'm not sure I understand what Ted's saying here. Is he saying that the listing actually reads "The Hypnotist, aka London After Midnight" as per Sid's account of it? If so, where is this listing to be found? I take the second part of his statement to say that the listing showed no
available materials on the title, and the specific whereabouts of the
print are still uncertain? >.
>
> > Matt,
>
> "lzcutter" <l...@classiclasvegas.com> wrote in message
>
> > If I understand correctly what Ted has posted both at Horrordrunx and at CHFB, is that he says he saw the listing "The Hypnotist aka London After Midnight" in the old MGM database when he was working at the Jefferson facility in the early 2000s. �By then, of course, the merge
with Turner/Time Warner had taken place and the pre-1986 MGM safety
elements were moved to Time-Warner vaults. �Newsom says that they had
access to the old MGM database on the laptops they were using for the
approximate year that he worked at the facility.
> Ted's latest post to the HorrorDrunx forum states that he *didn't* see "The Hypnotist aka London After Midnight" listing when he was at the warehouse, but he also states that he was only there for a few days and never looked for it! This seems like a complete contradiction of his earlier statement, and ultimately doesn't prove anything one way or the other.
If I may (jeeeze...): my little anecdote has been up on CHFB for 2 or
3 years, and the identical story was posted on Scarlet Street probably
2 years before that. I expect that Sid saw the elements and specifics
listed in mine, and used them to create his opus-- thus my "later"
story appears to verify his "earlier" experience. If you follow that.
I haven't reversed or contradicted myself. In 2002, I accessed the
MGM database on the company laptop; I was not sitting in the Bonded
warehouse at the time, nor would there have been any reason to look
for an old MGM film at Bonded, since there were none there. There
were Cannon films, and Monograms, and Embassys and Warners...but no
MGM films, not from the "real" MGM era. And the only reason that
current MGM/UA even HAD a database for the old MGM films was that
occasionally a film would be found that didn't belong where it had
been stored.
The entry in the data base was odd. They usually have the basic
information: title, length, description of the assets, warehouse, and
warehouse location. Sometimes there's more, but rarely less. This
entry said only "The Hypnotist aka London After Midnight." I've always
granted that this entry could have been made by some filmbuff wag as a
time bomb practical joke. However, at the time, I cross-checked
several hundred other titles to see if any similar "blank pages" came
up, and could find none. (I think someone, subsequently, actually
found another "lost" film listed without location information.)
There was nothing on that entry "page" to indicate where this phantom
film may have been stored. Kansas? Italy? England? New Jersey?
Across town? Nothing. So leaping to the conclusion that, simply
because I described the Inglewood warehouse at length in the on-line
posts I've made, that the L.A.M. entry referred to that particular
vault, is a mistake (which Mr. Sid T seems to have incorporated into
his tale, along with, unfortunately, several dozen other mistakes.)
Nor have I ever backtracked and said I didn't see the entry. I did
say--on the deleted horrordrunx post-- that neither what I said nor
what Sid Terror claimed can be proven. It's all anecdotal; there is
no proof whatsoever that either of us are telling the truth, and we
could conceivably be making the whole thing up. And that's true
enough. You can claim all day that you were captured by a ufo and
taken to another planet, but unless you come back with a souvenir
ashtray with "Made in Andromeda" printed on the underside, it's just
talk. Neither he nor I have an ashtray.
I still think he had good intentions when he wrote his story.
boba...@gmail.com
>
> I also seriously didn't want my name to be at the forefront of this,
> because with all the talk that has been funneled toward myself, I'm
> afraid that people are getting distracted from the article and its
> very important information. This is about LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT, not
> me. I have found a lot of the personal attention a bit embarrassing
> and at times exasperating, but a name HAD to be put on the article.
I'd really like to believe that, but the article is loaded with so
much personal history that it's very hard to separate the two. And,
as Sid admits, LAM has been the subject of so many hoaxes in the past
that a person's credibility is automatically going to come into
question if he steps forward with such an incredible tale.
I'd also say that it's unfortunate he chose a website such as "The
Horror Drunx" to post his story. It's not simply the name that does
nothing to bolster confidence, it's also the fact that their own forum
board features an entire folder dedicated to "Hoaxes" (and no, it's
not the exposing of hoaxes, it's there for the encouraging of members
to take part in specific ones). Given that, I think it's
understandable that recognized restoration experts are, to say the
least, leery about this entire claim.
boba...@gmail.com
> board features an entire folder dedicated to "Hoaxes"
Correction, not "hoaxes" but "pranks and propaganda" complete with
member "assignments." Take from that what you will...