Is the Drive-in Theater Back?

Milford Drive-in Theater

In January, I went to see a high school basketball game with my cousin and I got a great idea. In the summer, we should drive over to Sacramento, pick up her brother, and go to the West Wind Drive-in Theater!

She didn’t immediately take to the idea because she knows the kind of movies that I like. But I explained that we would see a “normal” film. There would (sadly) be no Blood Feast playing there anyway.

And then the pandemic started and I despaired of getting to do this. But I shouldn’t have. Drive-in theaters may end up being big winners from this crisis.

Childhood Memories

Many people have noticed that drive-in theaters are kind of pre-social-distancing.

A large percentage of my memories from childhood involve movies: on television, in the theater, and at the drive-in. I especially remember my older sister sticking my younger sister and me in the trunk of the car to save money getting into the drive-in. It seems that everyone did that — to the point where theaters started just charging by the car.

One of my earliest memories was going to the drive-in to see The Planet of the Apes and Beneath the Planet of the Apes with my friend George and his parents. I must have been 6-years-old. George fell asleep, which still shocks me. He missed the reveal of the people who worship the bomb!

When I first went to grad school, I went to the drive-in a number of times. I remember seeing Dick Tracy and Terminator 2: Judgment Day.

Technological Changes

By the 1980s, most drive-ins had switched from physical speakers to FM broadcasting. So the sound when I saw these films in 1990 was fine. The visuals, however, were not. They were faded out — a lot like those illegal DVDs people used to sell that had been video-taped during a showing of the film.

I’m happy to hear that the drive-in theater industry eventually addressed this problem. In recent years, theaters have been converting to digital projection. Sadly, this is going along with the consolidation of the industry because this technological change is expensive. So we are seeing a lot of chains, like West Wind that I discussed earlier.

Pandemic Movies

The movie industry has adjusted to the pandemic by releasing films directly to streaming. And that’s great! (I guess it’s great; I almost never see new films.) But people still like to make movie-going an event.

And I suspect soon the theaters will open up. I don’t see a problem if precautions are taken. (It’s interesting that airplanes are filling up but movie theaters aren’t. I’m not saying either should go back to normal but I see a distinct class element here.)

But many people have noticed that drive-in theaters are kind of pre-social-distancing. Sure: there might be some issues at the snack bar and the bathrooms. But these can all be managed. For example, some theaters are offering food service at cars.

And while all the indoor theaters around me are closed, you can still go to the drive-in. At the San Jose drive-in, they are showing a bunch of well-designed double features. For example: ET and Jurassic Park. But they also have new films: The Hunt and The Invisible Man.

Temporary drive-ins are opening up. I just read about two in the Chicago area. Another in Maryland. And Colorado. And these are just some that have been reported on in the last day!

I really don’t know if drive-in theaters will ever again be more than nostalgia for old people like me. But changes in the technology are a good sign. The indoor theater doesn’t offer me much. I’m thrilled that the drive-ins near me are playing double-features. I don’t expect I will ever prefer the drive-in to my home theater. But if they were equally accessible, I’d definitely pick the drive-in over the indoor theater.

And not just for nostalgia.


Milford Drive-in Theater by Laxbot7 under CC BY-SA 4.0.

Anniversary Post: They Might Be Giants

They Might Be Giants

On this day, 9 June, in 1971, They Might Be Giants was released. It’s one of my all-time favorite films. But I must admit that the first time I saw it I was bewildered by it. I just didn’t grok it. I guess I was just too young and too sane.

Or maybe it is that the film is all about the nature of reality — something I didn’t connect with much when I was young. Now it’s the main thing I think about. In the film, George C Scott plays Justin Playfair, a retired judge who thinks he is Sherlock Holmes. Or is he Sherlock Holmes? I’d say that you are more likely to enjoy the film if you go along with it.

But the main thing in They Might Be Giants is that it is filled with colorful characters played by colorful character actors like Al Lewis (The Munsters), Rue McClanahan (The Golden Girls), Oliver Clark (A Star Is Born), and Jack Gilford (A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum).

How to Watch They Might Be Giants

I highly recommend seeing it if you haven’t. Below, I’ll embed a great print (while it lasts). But you can get it on Blu-ray with a director commentary, a featurette, and the extra scene in the grocery store (sadly not integrated with the film as it has been in other releases).

Next year will be the 50th anniversary of its release. We will have to do something for it. It is a spectacular film!

See our article on the film.


The Might Be Giants DVD case via Wikipedia under Fair use.

Anniversary Post: Invaders From Mars

Invaders From Mars

Things just turned out this way: another Tobe Hooper film was released. This time it is Invaders From Mars on 6 June 1986. I enjoy it a lot but it isn’t one of my favorites.

So why am I talking about it today? Because critics have hated it and continue to do so.

Let me take a review from Time Out that is actually better than most. It says:

“The effects are magnificent, but whereas the original worked by building up an increasingly black mood, this version relies almost entirely on the special effects; and such limited brooding tension as it has is gratuitously undermined by a string of sequences played purely for laughs.”

So this version of the film works almost entirely by using special effects? I don’t agree with that at all. But if that were the case, why is it a bad thing? Why is building up a black mood the correct way to go? Should this version of the film do that too? I know what the critic would have said if the film had done that, “This version just repeats what was done better in 1953”!

Then we learn that the limited brooding tension that the film managed was destroyed by its comedic elements. If I didn’t know better, I’d think the filmmakers hadn’t actually been going for the “black mood” of the original.

“Not What I Wanted to See!”

This has got to be the single most annoying film criticism: “This film was not at all what I wanted to see!” Feature films generally take years to make. There’s a really good chance that what is up on the screen is what the filmmakers wanted.

I understand: sometimes you just don’t like a film. You wish it had gone in another direction. But I fail to see how this is a criticism of the film. It’s like complaining that you didn’t like Eaten Alive because you were really more in a comedy mood.

Even if you think a film critic is just an ombudsman, how is that helpful? The Time Out review ends, “Fun, but very silly.” Okay. That would have made a better complete review. It would have warned potential viewers that this film with its obviously cheeky 1950s science fiction film title will not be like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.

Good, I guess…


Invaders From Mars poster via Wikipedia under Fair use.

Anniversary Post: It Came From Outer Space

It Came From Outer Space

On this day, 5 June, in 1953, It Came From Outer Space was released. It’s especially notable because it isn’t a film you can easily reduce to an allegory about communist fears.

Listening to people now days you would think that the only thing on the minds of Americans in the 1950s was the rise of communism. Certainly, people were afraid of that — mostly because they were constantly told to be afraid of it by the media’s easy alliance with the government. But people feared a lot of things. And people really did fear invaders from Mars!

Hopeful Aliens

But It Came From Outer Space is a hopeful film with nice aliens who just happened to crash on Earth and are trying to repair their space ship and get back home.

Today, I’m pretty tired of this. I want to bang my head on a wall whenever I hear about Gene Roddenberry “optimistic vision” of the future. What it ended up being was his boring vision of later television drama where everyone is so well-adjusted the plots seem more like clever puzzles than stories about human beings.

Drama!

It Came From Outer Space isn’t like that at all. That’s mostly because everyone thinks that John, played by Richard Carlson (Creature from the Black Lagoon), is suffering from a concussion. And then when the sheriff does believe him, there’s more conflict.

And the moral of the story is something we all know: humans suck. It makes a great pairing with Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

It Came From Outer Space also features Barbara Rush (When Worlds Collide) and Russell Johnson (This Island Earth). It’s based on a Ray Bradbury story. And made by the same group that would bring us Creature from the Black Lagoon the next year.

You can get a good print of it (MPEG4) for free at Archive.org. Unfortunately, it doesn’t embed correctly. There is a Blu-ray of it available that comes with a commentary by Tom Weaver, for those who are fans.


It Came From Outer Space poster via Wikipedia under Fair Use.

Anniversary Post: Poltergeist

Poltergeist

On this day, 4 June, in 1982, Poltergeist was released. At the time of its release, it terrified me. And it remains a sold haunted house film with some nice touches like the mother at first finding it kind of delightful.

It also has a wonderfully subversive subtext with people getting rich by literally providing homes on top of the corpses of Native Americans. And I just love that the father is reading Reagan the Man the President.

But it’s hard for me to watch today without seeing its flaws. The lore of the film is that Steven Spielberg is who really directed it. I don’t accept that at all, but as co-writer and producer, his fingers are all over it. Poltergeist only feels like a Tobe Hopper film now and then.

Poltergeist vs The Funhouse

Yesterday, I watched The Funhouse — Hooper’s 1981 film about some kids who spend the night in the funhouse and end up hunted by two carnies — one of whom is literally a monster (sympathetic though he may be).

Instead of the made-for-TV parents in Poltergeist, The Funhouse features an emotionally distant father and an alcoholic mother. And frankly, it’s just more tightly produced. It was created for the ages not a few weeks of major release.

But I don’t want to be unfair. Poltergeist is a very good film. And the plot unravels beautifully. And the swimming pool scene with the skeletons is just fantastic.

Tobe Hooper as Director

I’ve come to the conclusion that Tobe Hooper is the Orson Welles of horror. By that I mean that he wasn’t all that interested in creating finished films. He was interested in experimenting and pushing his craft further.

That’s how you get later films like Crocodile, which many people can’t understand. Yes, overall, it’s a standard teen horror film. But it also has moments that are as good as anything he ever did.

Hooper didn’t talk that much about his work. And when he did, he didn’t say much. He seemed to be an extremely introverted guy. There was clearly a lot going on inside that only came out clearly in his work.

I think he took opportunities like Crocodile to try out new things. And that says a lot about him. Because he could have just ossified. If he had, critics and audiences would have liked him a lot more than they did. But he fought that and ended up always creating interesting films.

Poltergeist is definitely part of that. But I don’t think it needs my voice to add to the chorus of people singing its praise. There are already more than enough people doing that — mostly people who have never watched Eaten Alive or Djinn.

But let’s face it: most critics resented Hooper for continuing to be a horror director. The director of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was supposed to develop past that to start making art films. They never realized that he had already started making art films and never stopped.


Poltergeist poster via Wikipedia under Fair Use.

Recent Additions: May 2020

Psychotronic Review

It was a big month for new short takes. I can’t really get through a day without watching a film — usually a horror film. But as usual, I’m going to have to look up half the films here. It was only after writing two articles about Monster From The Ocean Floor that I remembered what it was about.

This doesn’t speak to the quality of the films. But it does speak to the quality of the titles. Like The Beast Must Die. That could be about anything!

  1. 13 Frightened Girls (1963): probably my least favorite William Castle film. But then, I’m not that target audience of 13-year-old girls. It’s well-made, though.
  2. 13 Ghosts (1960): a light horror mystery from our man Castle. This is a good one to get your kids started on horror films.
  3. And Now the Screaming Starts! (1973): one of the better Amicus features. Very effective!
  4. Asylum (1972): another collection of short horror films from Amicus. I particularly like the one about the chopped-up lady.
  5. The Babysitter (1980): made-for-television film about an unstable nanny who destroys a family. Features William Shatner in a regular-guy role.
  6. Beast From Haunted Cave (1959): a standard low-budget monster movie about a group of criminals on the run. Notable mostly for taking place in the snow.
  7. The Beast Must Die (1974): this is the kind of film that psychotronic fans live for. Who would think to combine a werewolf with an insane big game hunter? You’ve got to see this!
  8. Black Christmas (1974): one of the earliest slasher films and one of the best. It’s really nice to have a story that doesn’t feature any kind of clever back-story. There’s a crazy guy and he’s murdering people. That’s enough.
  9. Blood Ties (1991): a new take on the vampire. Unfortunately, this has been done to death now. But if you can get past that, it’s a solid film.
  10. BMX Bandits (1983): a bike-oriented kids film that made Nicole Kidman a star. If you were into those bikes when you were a kid, you’ll love this film. I, of course, was inside watching horror films.
  11. Captain Kronos – Vampire Hunter (1974): if released today, this title would be cheeky. But this film is for real. It’s a wonderful combination of horror and adventure. This is a classic!
  12. Chop (2011): a truly funny horror comedy that surprises right up to its denouement, which is purposefully anti-climatic. I love this film!
  13. Countess Dracula (1971): horror film based on the true-life psychopath Elizabeth Báthory. Other than actually getting younger, this is probably how it was.
  14. Day of Anger (1967): a good Spaghetti Western that maybe tries a bit too hard to be serious.
  15. Day the World Ended (1955): another of those 1950s post-nuclear war films that mostly take place in a single room. This one is pretty good.
  16. Death Smiles on a Murderer (1973): basically a period zombie picture that is pretty twisted.
  17. Doll Factory (2014): a teen horror-comedy that is genuinely funny. And most of the teens are horrible so it’s fun to see them eaten by dolls.
  18. Escape from LA (1996): people hated this film when it came out but today, it’s probably more fun to watch than the original.
  19. Escape from New York (1981): a solid action film although I don’t especially care. I’ve never gotten over Adrienne Barbeau dying.
  20. The Evil (1978): people renovating an old house unleash a demon and need to find their way out. The set is great and the film a lot better than it has any right to be.
  21. Forest Primeval (2008): a lesser film by the Polonia brothers, it’s a bit slow but definitely has its moments.
  22. Frankenstein Meets the Space Monster (1965): a pleasant 1960s Scifi film about Martians stealing our women. Nothing to be sought or avoided.
  23. God’s Gun (1976): a great Spaghetti Western with Lee Van Cleef playing two roles. It’s a lot of fun.
  24. Homicidal (1961): one of William Castle’s best. I think it’s better than Psycho.
  25. House of the Long Shadows (1983): the only film featuring Vincent Price, Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, and John Carradine. Even apart from that, it’s a good film.
  26. Inferno (1980): The second film in The Three Mothers trilogy. Very creepy with great practical effects and look. Essential viewing!
  27. The Kentucky Fried Movie (1977): great sketch comedy featuring four segments that should appeal to psychotronic fans.
  28. Krippendorf’s Tribe (1998): a widely-hated but hilarious screenball comedy.
  29. The Little Shop of Horrors (1960): this is a very funny film. If you haven’t seen it, what’s wrong? Here: a free copy!
  30. Mandao of the Dead (2018): a youthful comedy with a horror angle. I’m really looking forward to what this group does in the future.
  31. Monster From The Ocean Floor (1954): Roger Corman’s first film is pretty good. And the shark scene is great.
  32. Mother of Tears (2007): the last of The Three Mothers trilogy. It features great practical horror effects. Don’t believe the haters.
  33. Mr Sardonicus (1961): this is a really good film but the make-up effects do make it seem kind of silly.
  34. The Norliss Tapes (1973): the pilot of what looks like what would have been a great series. It features an unusual zombie story.
  35. The Old Dark House (1963): William Castle’s remake is quite enjoyable. This is another one for the kids.
  36. Paranoiac (1963): story of a very screwed-up family. Solid narrative.
  37. Phantom of the Paradise (1974): a surprisingly good musical and parody of Faust and Phantom of the Opera.
  38. A Pistol for Ringo (1965): a very good Spaghetti Western that spawned a ton of sequels.
  39. Rats: Night of Terror (1984): Two hundred years after nuclear war, rats have become very dangerous. Pretty fun film.
  40. Seven Psychopaths (2012): a fun but intense film about a bunch of really bad people. You know they have to be bad if Colin Farrell is the most likable character.
  41. Shanghai Joe (1973): more or less a film version of Kung Fu with over-the-top action sequences.
  42. Schlep (2016): teen comedy from the same group that brought us Mandao of the Dead.
  43. Serpent Island (1954): low-budget film aboard a ship on its way to Haiti. It’s surprisingly engaging.
  44. Support Your Local Gunfighter (1971): solid comedy with great production values. Most people like the original more.
  45. Support Your Local Sheriff (1969): simple comedy with a strong lead performance and a great supporting cast.
  46. Terror of Dracula (2012): a low-budget and very talky Dracula adaptation. Good acting.

That’s all for this month. I’ll probably focus more on horror next month.

I’d say the following are worth owning: The Beast Must Die, Black Christmas, Captain Kronos – Vampire Hunter, Chop, Doll Factory, Escape from LA, Escape from New York, Homicidal, Inferno, The Kentucky Fried Movie, A Pistol for Ringo, And Now the Screaming Starts! The rest are either of less interest or are only marginally psychotronic.

Also: just download The Little Shop of Horrors since it is free and something you’ll want to watch every few years.

Anniversary Post: Price, Cushing, and Lee

House of the Long Shadows

Yesterday, 26 May, was Peter Cushing’s birthday. He was born in 1913.

And today, 27 May, is the birthday of Vincent Price (1911) and Christopher Lee (1922).

Three titans of horror. Three excellent actors. Three tall men. All born around the same date.

I guess they were also all friends, although it’s very hard to tell when it comes to actors who are always playing a part when a camera is rolling.

Collaborations

Everyone knows that Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing starred in a lot of films together. Watching a collection of Hammer films is a lot like watching “The Cushing and Lee Show. “

I know of only two films that featured Price and Cushing. The first was Dr Phibes Rises Again although Cushing is barely in it and probably wasn’t even on set at the same time as Price. Much better is Madhouse where they work together closely and brilliantly. It’s a great part for Cushing!

And there’s only one film I know of with just Price and Lee: The Oblong Box. It’s a great film but the two men don’t work that much with each other.

All Three Men

There are two films that feature all three men. The first was 1970’s Scream and Scream Again. It’s a good film that has you confused until the very end. The problem with it is that Peter Cushing is hardly in it all.

If you want to celebrate this occasion, you should watch House of the Long Shadows. It’s an ensemble film but the three men are all primary. And as a special extra it also features John Carradine!

And I just happened to have found a wonderful copy of the film on YouTube. So here’s to Peter Cushing, Vincent Price, and Christopher Lee!


Image from House Of The Long Shadows via Amazon under Fair Use.

The Shark in Monster From the Ocean Floor

Filmfax Issue 102

I’ve stated before that the most interesting thing in Monster From the Ocean Floor is the scene where the lead character fights off a shark. Well, I got more information on this.

You can see a bit of this sequence in the trailer at the link above. But it’s much more impressive than that. What’s in the trailer looks impressive because they are using a long lens, which compresses distance and so makes it looks like the shark is right on top of her when it isn’t.

Luckily, the actor, Anne Kimbell, talked about this in an interview with Michael Barnum for Filmfax 102 (2004), “Monster (from the Ocean Floor) Hunter.”

I got this off the DVD for the film. In it, Tom Weaver quotes from the article:

On the last day, Roger said, “Now about the scene where you fight the shark…” I said, “Roger, “I’m not fighting a shark.” And he said, “Oh no, Anne. It is a very old shark. So again I said, “Roger, I am not fighting a shark!” He said, “We’re going to put a net around it, Anne. It can’t hurt you. It practically doesn’t have any teeth. Besides, the thing we really have to be careful about is that this is a valuable shark…”

There are things that don’t make sense. There is no net apparent in the film. I suspect what he meant was that there would be a net around the whole area so that the valuable shark didn’t escape.

And old or not, toothless or not, a six-foot (blue?) shark is still dangerous. Just running into her could have caused damage.

It Ain’t Anne Kimbell

But this is the most remarkable part of the interview:

So when you watch the movie, the lady fighting the shark is not me. It is the wife of photographer Al Hanson who lived and worked on Catalina Island. His wife, who was also a deep-sea diver, fought the shark.

That’s Al Hanson who did some underwater cinematography (and probably a lot more than he got credit for).

I’ve watched that sequence over and over. They do a good job of not allowing us to see the diver’s face in the shark scenes. But I’ve spent a lot of time trying to notice body differences and I just don’t see them. It all looks like Anne Kimbell. It is definitely not like that great scene in I’m Gonna Git You Sucka.

Also: Roger Corman Was Kind of a Dick

I admire Corman. I think people obsess about him too much. But being a low-budget film producer is hard. And he did it well. But it was all about the money. And he stepped on a lot of toes.

Monster From the Ocean Floor was Corman’s first film as producer. And he already had it down. He got everyone to work for little or nothing in exchange for a cut of the film. Anne Kimbell:

Roger showed the movie briefly in the theaters then he cut it and sold it to TV and made a lot of money to start is own picture career. Unfortunately, those of us that had started on commission never got much money because our commission was going to be on theatrical release, not the television part.

And I’m sure that was a mistake. I’ve gotten used to this. Most of the low-budget producers of the past did so on the backs of the idealism of those around them. And in the end, they get the money and all the credit.

Meanwhile, we don’t even know the name of the woman who did the scenes with the shark.


Filmfax 102 via Amazon under Fair Use.

Anniversary Post: Rats: Night of Terror

Rats: Night of Terror

On this day, 23 May, in 1984, the Italian horror film Rats: Night of Terror was released!

I’ll admit, when I first heard of this film, I was skeptical. I like rats and I don’t like to see them as antagonists in films. (They aren’t in Willard. There, they are just meting out justice.)

But at least the rats are presented as smart. And it has a very happy ending!

Rats was co-written and directed by exploitation master Bruno Mattei. He’s mostly known for never doing anything new. If a film was doing well at the box office, he’d make his own version.

Salon Kitty was a big deal in 1976. So in 1977, Mattei brought the world SS Girls. How do you not love that?!

Night of the Living Rats

Rats is more or less Night of the Living Dead — but with rats. Michael Weldon says it has more or less the same plot as Chosen Survivors, but I haven’t seen it so I can’t say for sure. And clearly, I’m sure it’s also ripping off Willard.

The basis of the movie is that there was a nuclear war in 2015. The survivors head underground and live there. After a hundred years, some of them decided to live above ground. Thus humanity was divided into two groups. The film takes place 110 years after that in 2225.

The story centers on a biker gang (with a tank and a truck) living in a barren land, scavenging to survive. They are a stylish bunch with cool names like Chocolate, Lucifer, and Video!

All is going well after they come to an abandoned town. They find a bunch of food that has somehow survived for 210 years. But then they discover various dead bodies. And the rats start to attack. And then they start to die.

Rats Is a Good Time

Rats is filled with great practical effects. And it does a particularly great job of combining real rats with fake ones. Although the river of rats can be a bit much at times. Of course, one of the treats of this film is that it is always at least a little over the top.

What’s most remarkable here, however, is how compelling the story is. The characters are a lot more real than they have any right to be. That’s especially true of Chocolate (Geretta Geretta) and Video (Gianni Franco).

Everything about the film seems better than it should be. The sets are really good. The lighting is always interesting if sometimes a bit too dark. (This may be a video artifact; projected film always has much better contrast.) The camera work is lively without being excessive. And the editing pulls the story along mostly, although there are moments when it seems like there wasn’t transition material.

I highly recommend seeing Rats: Night of Terror if you get the chance. It’s not great. And one of the female characters is too much like Barbra in the original Night of the Living Dead. But it’s quite an enjoyable hour and a half.


Rats: Night of Terror DVD cover is via Amazon and taken under Fair Use.

Anniversary Post: Vertigo

Vertigo (1958)

On this day, 22 May, in 1958, Vertigo went into wide release. It had its premiere on 9 May in San Francisco. Then it was released in the UK. Finally, the week after, it was released in the US.

People who have been reading me for a while are probably thinking, “Oh no! Not another hit piece on Hitchcock!” But it’s not! Rather, I want to look at the other side of it.

Imagine Destroying John Carpenter’s Career

One of my favorite filmmakers is John Carpenter. There is no filmmaker who consistently delights me more. A number of his films are my very favorites: The Thing, Prince of Darkness, They Live, and In the Mouth of Madness.

(There is so much more to love in Carpenter’s catalog. In addition to all the usual ones that people mention, there’s Vampires, which I really enjoy. And Escape From LA has really grown on me.)

But if people spoke of John Carpenter as though he was some brilliant art film director, I wouldn’t be able to take it. And I say that knowing that Carpenter is as skilled and creative a director as you will find. If he wanted to make art films, they’d be wonderful.

But he doesn’t make art films. (I wouldn’t love his work as much if he did.) It would be an insult to him to pretend that he does — an insult to him but also an insult to the kinds of films that he makes and that I love.

Hitchcock Was Better Than Vertigo

I wish that I could do something for poor Alfred Hitchcock. He deserves better. Above all, he deserves to have his great films admired. I think Vertigo is a joke.

The contortions I’ve seen critics go through to justify why it is a great film! Oh yes, the boring pastels of the film are so meaningful! And the boring plot? Pure genius!

Vertigo is the Alfred Hitchcock film for people who don’t like Alfred Hitchcock. Almost any other Hitchcock film would be a better symbol of his talent. And it shows that all those critics and film “scholars” who supposedly love his work so much don’t really appreciate it at all.

Rather than Vertigo, watch Shadow of a Doubt or The Birds or Strangers on a Train. Or better yet, watch Halloween.


Vertigo poster by Paramount Pictures Corporation — in the Public Domain.