Customer Reviews

The Essential Monster Movie Guide: A Century of Creature Features on Film, TV, and Video

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This guide book pretty much follows the typical movie guide format - the movie title and year, a description and brief critique, and a rating. The author gets extra points for also including information on any novels or novelisations published in relation to the film, and frequent comments about the film's score composers (a nice extra touch). The entire volume is in alphabetic order, with film titles mixed alongside brief biography entries for genre people, instead of in a separate index.

Where the book falls down, though, is in the lack of a clear set of rules defining what's in the book, and what's not. The best the reader gets is a comment about the book being for "the classic monsters" which I believe might upset some Godzilla fans who won't find any of that Japanese classic monster's movies included, for example.

The book becomes almost schizophrenic in its comprehensiveness: single episodes of television shows are included if they happened to contain a vampire (even standard soap operas and sitcoms), and movies gain entry if they include a clip from a classic (for example, where James Whale's FRANKENSTEIN appears on a monitor screen in a scene in an otherwise non-genre film); yet there are plenty of films one would THINK should certainly fit the book's format, yet no entry is found. The end result is a sometimes frustrating experience for the reader who will simply wonder why a particular title is not included...and without those clearly defined rules, there is no justification.

On the other hand, the book has its own benefits that help it stand comfortably next to other monster-movie genre guides like 'Creature Features'. The introduction and foreward are very entertaining in their own right, and the author includes a section on his own top choice genre selections. He also clearly prefers to form and maintain his own opinions on these films rather than follow popular opinion, which is a practice sometimes found in other guide books. Even so, there are a few entries that are based on hearsay instead of actual viewing experience, a fact that is readily admitted in the introduction. The ratings given are understandably done as a comparison to other genre films because - to paraphrase the author - to compare them to CITIZEN KANE would result in a majority of them getting only one star.

All in all, a worthy purchase as a reference guide and an entertaining read, but beware of the frustration that potentially comes along with it. The buyer may want to consider supplementing it with another guide.

Less an "essential" guide than an overly ambitious trifle for browsing through in idle moments, this frustrating book will incense buffs with its blatant omissions of valid monster films in favor of pointless listings for TV shows and even porno flicks with "classic monster" cameos. Misguided and woefully incomplete though it is, the book does contain helpful filmographies of monsterdom's movers and shakers and the photos are topnotch. Its eccentric format will ultimately reward trivia-mongers with enough patience to sift through all the obscurity.

The best thing about the book is Forrest J. Ackerman's sprawling foreword, a `Monster Mosaic' in which the erstwhile editor of Famous Monsters of Filmland magazine recaps his long affinity (nearly 80 years) with monster moviedom. It's classic Ackermonster at his self-satisfied best (worst?), bragging, boasting, dropping famous names and tossing off juvenile puns with glee. Among minor pop culture figures with outsized egos, Ackerman has only one serious rival (Marvel Comics' Stan Lee) for shameless self-promotion. But give Ackerman his due: His gaudily cool magazine was an inspiration to legions of lonely kids (myself among them) who might otherwise have felt ashamed for liking monster flicks.

(Memo from an old monster buff: Two out-of-print books worth searching for are "An Illustrated History of the Horror Film" by Carlos Clarens and "Horror in the Cinema" by Ivan Butler - both scholarly but very entertaining.)

This is a mess. It's difficult to imagine who this is aimed at. There's far too little information to use it as a 'what to watch' guide for the casual viewer. Horror fans will find their blood boiling as cult classics are panned while borderline mainstream dreck enjoys generous appraisal. Many masterpieces simply aren't there while a worryingly large number of nominally horror-based porn and kids cartoon shows take their place. Most of these aren't easily available, I get the impression the author hasn't seen a lot of them, and I can't imagine many horror fans wanting to anyhow. No 'Masque of the Red Death'? Don't worry, here's a few episodes of 'The Flintstones' featuring Count Rockula! Bizarre.

Maybe it started out as an attempt to be definitive, then gave up as deadlines loomed. Who knows? Stephen Jones - at least I assume this is the same author - has penned numerous books and articles on the horror genre, but judging by this, has burnt out on monsters somewhere along the line. Which is fair enough, but expecting those who still relish all things creepy and ghoulish to put up with this limp effort is not. Very poor and faintly insulting to the genre it attempts, and conspicuously fails to cover.

Besides the fact that Stephen Jones sounds like he is not a big fan of the genre, his "comprehensive" volume excludes a large number of horror movies for the sake of including way too many "erotic" horror movies and horror cartoons. The fact that he has a low opinion of some of the most popular horror movies of all time is annoying, but I realize everyone is entitled to their opinion. There are instances, too, where I have read his synopsis of a movie and it appears, to me, that he clearly hadn't seen the movie. Even though this is one of the very few horror movie guides available, I can't recommend it.

I received this book as a gift, or I definitely would never have purchased it. It is lacking any sense of direction, as other reviews illustrate here, with obvious misses present: "The Birds", "Rosemary's Baby", "The Invisible Man", "The Black Cat"(1934), "Island of Lost Souls", "Jaws", "Curse of the Demon"(aka-Night of the Demon), "The Fearless Vampire Killers...", "Haxan-Witchcraft Through the Ages", "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", "Them!", "The Exorcist"(I'm surprised the horror geeks aren't rattling their cages about this one alone). Maybe "Psycho" wouldn't be found in a 'Monster Movie Guide', but why is "It! The Terror from Beyond Space" present and, yet, not Ridley Scott's "Alien" or its sequels? It is also very difficult to follow, with "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" under "M" for just "Meet Frankenstein"(perhaps this was an original title or something, but, in all the guides I've ever seen, it's always been under A & C's names), with no explanation here for why Jones uses this title. Although, on the other hand, there are several early silent versions of lots of the classic monsters-as, for example, several "Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde" versions included that predate even John Barrymore's turn as the part in 1920! Also, there are obscure but relatively important TV notations that are, often, well worth the look-as "Nightmare the Birth of Horror"(although the title actually was "Nightmare! The Birth of Victorian Horror"). These are a great find, if one can locate this BBC miniseries on the genesis of the books and characters of the classic gothic monsters-ie. Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein", Bram Stoker's "Dracula". These are a must-see for any true fan. Now, different, and refreshing, are the more subjective descriptions of film titles, with Jones using his own point of view as opposed to the standard run-of-the-mill descriptions. The downside, here, though, is that his "taste" is often lacking. I don't consider myself a fan of any particular date or style from the horror genre, but to critique FW Murnau's silent vampire film, "Nosferatu"-which is brilliant-as "overlong and dull", with a rating of above average(???), and the plodding British Hammer "Dracula(aka-Horror of Dracula)" of 1958 as having an "action-packed script"(I guess I apparently looked away for a moment), adding that it's only "a little slow in places", are simply a couple examples of Jones' consistancy for ludicrous assessments. Buyer beware: do yourself a favor and find this one used-or as cheaply as possible-and get the recent Leonard Maltin Movie Guide(released yearly, the newest has only just been released). This guide will give better direction and explanation, on a much more realistic and objective level, than Jones' book. Even Maltin's guide is not perfect, but the information is deeper(without Jones' obvious mistakes) and the ratings are much more realistic. Basically, just protect yourself from wasting time and money on one of Jones' favorites when it's really a clunker. "Creature Features" looks like a more interesting purchase, but not owning it, I won't judge. Both it and Jones' book offer obscure TV, though, with titles crossing over, like the BBC "Count Dracula" with Louis Jourdan, for example.

i did a fast skimming through this book and noticed that for an Essential Monster Movie Guide, it certainly doesn't praise or hype the genre that well. this book comes across like it was written by an elitist who's too good for horror. nearly every movie/special gets a low rating and i can't understand why a book like this that could've been a good companion to the horror fan would be so anti-horror as a whole. horror fans, in general, want to be be entertained and or scared...i for one don't want logical stories and things that make sense IF it detracts from the entertainment factor because typically what makes sense and uses logic in horror is BORING. it gets 2 stars from me because it offers a diverse selection of films and includes mini biographies of horror legends like Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, Lon Chaney, Boris Karloff, etc. But for a horror movie book, the writers certainly didn't help their genre by bad-mouthing it so much in this book.

Sure, the book does *try* to be pretty comprehensive. There's lots of obscure stuff here, and the author even includes porno movies if they feature vampires or something. It's even comprehensive enough to cover single monster-themed episodes of TV shows that didn't normally feature such things, like the episode where Gilligan dreams he's a vampire, or when the Gruesomes move next door to the Flintstones.

Actually, it's *too* inclusive at times. Movies are included simply because one or more characters watch clips of *other* movies, suggesting that the author would include 'Malcolm In The Middle' because of that show's opening montage. Likewise included are documentary movies and TV shows that include clips of monster movies - for example, an episode of A&E's `Biography' that's about Boris Karloff. Also, there are entries for movies and TV episodes where a character just dresses up as a monster ('3 Men and a Little Lady' is included because Ted Danson's character dresses up as the vampiric "Count Cholesterol" for a commercial) or where people think that somebody *might* be a monster (like the is-Vincent-Price-a-vampire episode of `F-Troop'). Dubious inclusions like these just make the many omissions that much more unforgivable.

There's an awful lot missing. Probably the most egregious is the almost total lack of Japanese giant monsters - `King Kong vs. Godzilla', `King Kong Escapes', 'Frankenstein Conquers The World', 'War of the Gargantuas' and the documentary 'Godzilla, King of the Monsters' are all that's included - no real Godzilla movies, no Rodan, no Mothra and no Gamera, let alone anything more obscure like Daimajin. Also striking is the absence of 'Alien' or any of its sequels, and the same goes for 'Predator'. Also absent, all of the `Evil Dead' movies and most of the modern Lovecraft adaptations (`Re-Animator' and `Necronomicon' are included, `Bride of Re-Animator', `From Beyond' and the two `Unnamable' moves are not). None of the `Hellraiser' movies are included, either.

Some of the omissions are more noticeable than they'd normally be because of their proximity to similar material that made the cut. For instance, 'C.H.U.D II: Bud The CHUD' is included, the original is not. Likewise, `Gremlins' is not in the book but its sequel is. Neither "Swamp Thing' or its sequel are included, but we have individual write-ups for 3 separate episodes of the 'Swamp Thing' cartoon. There are entries for 2 episodes of the original 'Twilight Zone', and for 4 episodes of the 1980s 'Twilight Zone' series, but there is no entry for 'Twilight Zone: The Movie'.

Also noticeable is the fact that while some TV episodes are included, other episodes of the same show are omitted, despite equal (if not greater) monster content than those episodes that made the cut. For example, there is an entry for *1* episode of the original `The Outer Limits', and only 2 for the 1990s `The Outer Limits' series (the syndicated `Monsters' series from the early 1990s fares a little better, with 10 out of 72 episodes given their own entries). Also, since there were monsters in every single episode, why are there entries for *1* episode of 'The Real Ghostbusters' and only 3 out of 13 episodes of 'The 13 Ghosts of Scooby Doo"? (the other Scooby Doo series are better represented, but are still far from complete) It just begs the question - why bother to list individual episodes if you're not going to bother to do it right?

While it *could* be argued that the author's introduction explains why certain movies are not included (there's has a lone paragraph that could be taken to mean that he's focusing on "classic" monsters), the books actual contents don't bear that out. Nothing is in evidence anywhere to explain why certain things were omitted while other things were not - how can Gorgo be worthy of inclusion if Godzilla is not?

The only thing essential about this book is to avoid it.

To begin with, the lion's share of entries contain little or no critical commentary, and what little there is, is banal.
The book is preposterously inclusive in some areas...while ignoring many substantial films. Hokum and camp are generally the order of the day. Maybe that's the intent of the book, but it's not for me.
It's a flip-through book rather than a good read, and one that will rarely be glanced at again... The book's attractive, clean format and reasonable cost (for a book of its breadth) are about the only things to recommend it.

What's missing from this book?

Well, Rosemary's Baby, Evil Dead, The Shining, Suspiria, the Godizilla films and countless other classics.

What will you find?

Well, Nude Nasty Dripping Wet Vampires, Cleopatra Queen of Bondage, the Rocky Porno Video Show, and the ever popular horror film: The Sexual Life of Frankenstein. At one point, a review even laments the fact that a movie doesn't have any sex in it! Perhaps, he should write a porn guide since that seems to be his main interest. He certainly doesn't like horror all that much.

Oh and he includes such other popular 'horror' classics as: Three Men and a Little Lady, 21 Jump Street, Porky's II, and The Monkees (?!)

The sad part is, Mr. Jones went more into detailed descriptions with the hardcore and the 'nothing to do with horror' movies and tv shows, than with the real horror movies. Get this from the library for a hoot, but don't spend money on it.

I own at least 4 or 5 so-called "Monster Movie" video guides. They all more or less follow the same format and are pretty inclusive guides, however, THIS guide by Stephen Jones is the BEST one that I own! First of all it is up-to-date with DVD listings, etc. and most importantly, follows the recent trend in Euro-horror by listing and reviewing several of the more well-known titles. I enjoyed the trivia and the foreward by Forrest J. Ackerman. And who can resist buying this guide with that awesome "Wolf Man" cover?!?!? This guide really is very thorough and the author should be applauded for his eye for details which makes any great work worth its salt....or in this case garlic, mummy wrappings, and silver bullets (or canes!)