I'm bringing this from the thread about Forry's memorial as I really don't even want to bring up this guy's name in that thread.
Quote from: Jscareshock on January 05, 2009, 11:02:03 AM
Too bad. i was hoping it (Forry's Memorial) would coincide with Monsterpalooza and the relaunch of Famous Monsters.
You must not be aware that Forry and Ray Ferry, the current publisher of Famous Monsters, had a huge falling out and lawsuit... and there were years of bitterness between the 2 of them. Although some fans choose to set that aside and continue to enjoy their favorite magazine, many of us refuse to have anything to do with anything Ray Ferry attached to it. Certainly any memorial for Forry would be distantly removed from anything having to do with Ray Ferry. Ferry has used the FM website to rail against Forry at times. It's just a real bad scene.
What does that mean, "the relaunch of Famous Monsters" at Monsterpalooza?
I did a double-take on that too. Go look at the website.
Quote from: Toy Ranch on January 05, 2009, 10:01:52 PM
Go look at the website.
Is this it? I can't seem to find any mention of an FM relaunch.
http://www.rubberroom101.com/monsterpalooza09/index.html (http://www.rubberroom101.com/monsterpalooza09/index.html)
The "relaunch of Famous Monsters" referred to here has nothing at all to do with Ray Ferry. Instead it will be a new publication helmed by Philip Kim who won the right to use the name and trademark of "Famous Monsters" at an asset auction. Dr. Scareshock writes about this welcome changing of the guard in his column in the newest issue of Scary Monsters (#69) and there are lengthy discussions of the legal and other implications at the CHFB. You can check the details here:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/16696/t/A-New-Day-for-Famous-Monsters.html (http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/16696/t/A-New-Day-for-Famous-Monsters.html)
Quote from: roheimiana on January 05, 2009, 10:19:13 PM
Instead it will be a new publication helmed by Philip Kim
I thought maybe it had something to do with him. I thought Kim already "relaunched" it with his website/blog version. Is he gonna publish an FM mag at the same time Ferry is publishing his, or does he plan to put Ferry out of biz, first? I know that's what he said he was going to do, about 6-8 months ago, but I haven't heard anything about it since.
Every time I wade into the thread I linked to above I start feeling dizzy so I am no authority on Kim's intentions. Nevertheless, I understand the new Famous Monsters will soon appear in print in addition to remaining in its current cyber-format. I'm sure that our own Jscareshock can provide us with more accurate and up-to-date details.
Good golly gosh, roheimiana.... I got a headache 6 posts into it.... and they have 56 pages!
So there are 2 people publishing Famous Monsters of Filmland? Yikes!
Quote from: roheimiana on January 05, 2009, 10:54:46 PM
I understand the new Famous Monsters will soon appear in print in addition to remaining in its current cyber-format.
That'll be interesting. Dueling FMs! I wonder what # Kim's first issue will be?
FM ended with #210 as far as I am concerned. But I'd be willing to give the relaunch a shot as long as RF has absolutely nothing to do with it. I refuse to give that man a penny... ever!
I think Kim's version is the legal version. I look forward to his launch
Quote from: Mike Scott on January 05, 2009, 09:58:09 PM
What does that mean, "the relaunch of Famous Monsters" at Monsterpalooza?
Ray Ferry lost FAMOUS MONSTERS. The magazine was purchased by one Phil Kim at auction. Phil worked for Rhino Films. Phil is the new owner of the magazine and plans to relaunch it at the end of May with a big showing at the Egyptian Theater in LA. Phil was at San Diego Comic Con with Forry and Jim Warren when Forry and Jim passed the torch to Phil. Ray Ferry's site has not been updated since before Comic Con. Phil's site is www.famousmonstersoffilmland.
Anyway since Monster palooza was going on at the end of May and the original relaunch of FM was scheduled for the beginning of May it was decided to combine the 2 events to make Monsterpalooza one real/reel big show.
Thanks for the info, Jscareshock. That makes me feel better. So does this mean that RF can't publish ANY issues of FM anymore?
Let's hope so!
No $ from me to Ray Ferry, either--ever!
Alas, the Ferry version of Famous Monsters has now been reinvented as Shock! Theater Classics. Let's hope that Screen Gems/Sony still owns the copyright to Shock! and has something to say about this....
Quote from: roheimiana on January 17, 2009, 08:20:49 AM
Alas, the Ferry version of Famous Monsters has now been reinvented as Shock! Theater Classics.
Leave it to Ferry to come up with something original!
I bet it don't last long. Without the FM name the FM collectors won't want it and who else was buying Ferry's FM.
I hope you're right. As stated before, I stopped at FJA's last issue (210) and since RF can't produce FMs anymore (even though he promised #250 but I don't think it ever materialized) I hope the new FM will start at 250. I will buy the new FM on principal and see if I like the direction it takes. I don't know if it will go the classic route or take on more recent movies (Isn't that what Fango is for?) but I will certainly start my collecting again with the first "new" Famous Monsters Of Filmland.
I first learned of this through Jscareshock's article in Scary Monsters # 69, and might check out the first couple of Kim's issues as long as Bastard Ferry isn't involved. I refused to check out Ferry's mag because of all the trouble he was causing Forry Ackerman, and for my part considered Famous Monsters ended with the Warren issues.
Quote from: CreepysFan on January 17, 2009, 02:54:36 PM
. . and for my part considered Famous Monsters ended with the Warren issues.
I pretty much feel the same way. You can't go home, again.
Our very own Robert Aragon is the art director on the magazine. There is no way Robert would do anything against Forry.
Quote from: Jscareshock on January 17, 2009, 05:01:15 PM
Our very own Robert Aragon is the art director on the magazine.
Any other details you can share? Any word about the fight with Ferry over the TM?
Quote from: CreepysFan on January 17, 2009, 02:54:36 PM
I first learned of this through Jscareshock's article in Scary Monsters # 69, and might check out the first couple of Kim's issues as long as Bastard Ferry isn't involved. I refused to check out Ferry's mag because of all the trouble he was causing Forry Ackerman, and for my part considered Famous Monsters ended with the Warren issues.
Ferry needs to be kicked in the groin until he bleeds from the ears.
I wish them the best of luck, but I'm not real excited. Famous Monsters of Filmland had its day and now it's finished. Anything that comes afterward is just a new magazine with the same name.
It's kind of like Hammer Studios. The name might be there, and there might be a legal chain of corporate ownership, but the entity that exists today is not the same studio. And this new magazine will not be the same FM we read as children. It will have the same name and it might be very good, maybe even "better" than the original. But I can't jump up and down and say "FM is back!"
The most important difference is it won't be edited by Forry. How can it be FM without Forry? I can understand people wanting to rehabilitate the FM brand. It has really been dragged through the mud. And maybe this new incarnation will accomplish that. Or it might just trigger another lawsuit and more nonsense over this highly coveted and hotly contested brand name.
I tend to feel the same as raycastile on this one...when I look at the Warren FMs, I think "that's FM," and no other version is countable as real to me.
(In fact, even the Warren FMs started to become a pale reflection of themselves in the very last issues...I thought the magic was waning, the atmosphere was dissipating like fog in a graveyard as the sun comes up...)
I feel sad that what I feel was the "real" FM is gone, but at the same time, when I look at a nice old issue of FM, like the #103 I have in front of me right now, I see something that is really fine and special, and to me, it's special because it'll never be recreated.
I feel the same way, in a sense, about Forry, remembering him. That guy was a bright star, a true original, an exhuberant expression of himself.
All the original Warren magazines were a special magical ticket for childhood imagination, and no later incarnations have ever captured their unique flavor. Can't really comment on Ferry's FM, because I boycotted it from the start. The Creepy from the `90's were entertaining (Hello, Uncle Creepy fan, HAD to have them), but nowhere close to the original's greatness. The Vampirella from the `90's fell far short as well. Haven't tried the Vampirella currently out now. Now that Ferry has been kicked to the curb, I'm willing to give the new FM a chance, but already know to expect a brand new mag instead of my old childhood friend. The original Warren magazines were unique, and their special quality can never be replicated.
Even the 'old' FM seemed like it was beginning to unravel around the time of STAR WARS.
Quote from: Monster Bob on January 18, 2009, 06:23:21 PM
Even the 'old' FM seemed like it was beginning to unravel around the time of STAR WARS.
I think I stopped buying/reading it in the early 120's
I have to agree. With the release of Star Wars, FM seemed to go from monsters to a sci-fi format. It was about that time that I also stopped buying FM, though I stayed with the other Warren mags to the end. I used 1984 and The Rook for my sci-fi fix, but I counted on FM for my monster fix. When it started letting me down, I had no further use for it.
When the photo-covers started creeping in, FM became the unSTARLOG.
I like that someone is trying to revive the magazine and will give it a chance.
I was not privy to all the Ray Ferry/FJA stuff but from what I heard, I am glad Ferry is no longer involved.
I stopped buying FM around that same time. The classics were taking a back seat to newer films. It looks like that new FM is going to back away from the classics also. I saw only newer and non interesting stuff on the website. I think FM might be gone for good this time if he goes in this direction. At least I have the memories.
"I stopped buying FM around that same time. The classics were taking a back seat to newer films."
You know though, from the beginning FM treated both. As well as those classic "Coming Soon" forecasts (much of which never happened!), they covered stuff like Corman & AIP, right up to THE EXORCIST.
A new mag COULD work; as ever, it has to do with the talent & vision of the folks involved.
Best,
-Craig W.
Quote from: Wich2 on January 22, 2009, 10:00:47 PM
A new mag COULD work; as ever, it has to do with the talent & vision of the folks involved.
I see the Ferry supporters (i.e. Forry haters) are already trashing Phil Kim. One making up a story about Kim making a fool of himself at the SD Comic Con. Never happened, but nobody challenged him on it.
I think the problem wasn't that FM was covering new films, but that it was covering things outside the horror realm, like Star Wars, Star Trek, Superman, James Bond.
Quote from: raycastile on January 22, 2009, 10:59:20 PM
but that it was covering things outside the horror realm, like Star Wars, Star Trek, Superman,
Since that was the fantasy film scene, at the time, it's no surprise that that's what they'd be covering. Trouble was, there were other mags doing a better job of it.
Quote from: Mike Scott on January 22, 2009, 11:12:30 PM
Since that was the fantasy film scene, at the time, it's no surprise that that's what they'd be covering. Trouble was, there were other mags doing a better job of it.
That's why FM should have stuck with what it did best. In its younger days, did FM cover the Sean Connery Bond films? Maybe they did, I don't know. I imagine they covered some new sci-fi, like 2001 or Silent Running. I'm sure they gave Planet of the Apes plenty of coverage. But did they cover Diabolik or the Batman and Green Hornet TV shows? I seem to remember them covering the Doc Savage film. In any case, Superman and Roger Moore's James Bond felt all wrong in Famous Monsters of Filmland. As a kid, I remember thinking those articles were out of place. Starlog was the magazine for those films.
Quote from: raycastile on January 22, 2009, 11:24:41 PM
That's why FM should have stuck with what it did best.
And then all those kids that wanted to read about STAR WARS would have bought all the other mags and FM would have gone under sooner.
Quote from: raycastile on January 22, 2009, 11:24:41 PM
In its younger days, did FM cover the Sean Connery Bond films . . . 2001 or Silent Running . . . Planet of the Apes
Yep, all that stuff, plus all the Hammer and AIP horror (and sci-fi) and Harryhausen and other current movies. They had more of the '20s, '30s, '40s stuff than in the later issues, but still, a lot of the mag was always devoted to new movies.
What Mike said. And remember - 4SJ's first love was SciFi.
Great weekend,
-Craig W.
Just scanning the first 100 FM covers reveals that only about half of them featured a movie made before the first issue appeared in 1958. Nearly half of those were either Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, The Mummy (Universal), Dracula (Lugosi), or King Kong.
Just in case you haven't noticed, the UMA has earned a new distinction. Our modest speculation on the first HALF-PAGE of this thread has generated an additional SIX PAGES of speculation on the already epic thread at the CHFB. If you want to see what they're saying about us, you should start towards the bottom here:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/16696?page=56
(http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/16696?page=56)
Actually, I rather enjoy the comment that we're "living in a dream world". After all, what better reason could there be for getting up each morning? The only person I feel sorry for is poor Toy Ranch. He got a headache from reading only six posts at the other place and now he's got another 89 (and counting) to wade through! Please, Bobby, take it very, very slowly....
Quote from: roheimiana on January 23, 2009, 03:11:49 PM
I rather enjoy the comment that we're "living in a dream world".
I think that was made by the same guy (or one of his toadies) who was fantasizing about Kim having made a fool of himself at the Comic Con?
And who may have since been banned for his posts in this thread:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/21317?page=1 (http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/21317?page=1)
I love both the UMA and the CHFB. I give the UMA a slight edge in one area: people here are less likely to take up The Nasty Stick, and more likely to be shown the door if they do it repeatedly.
The older I get, the more I feel that if places like this aren't fun, they're nothing. And when posters get into personal insult, it's not fun.
Best,
-Craig W.
Quote from: Wich2 on January 23, 2009, 04:43:48 PM
And who may have since been banned for his posts in this thread:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/21317?page=1 (http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/21317?page=1)
I love both the UMA and the CHFB. I give the UMA a slight edge in one area: people here are less likely to take up The Nasty Stick, and more likely to be shown the door if they do it repeatedly.
The older I get, the more I feel that if places like this aren't fun, they're nothing. And when posters get into personal insult, it's not fun.
I agree. Though I read more than I post here, I very much enjoy the camaraderie of folks with an enthusiastically shared interest that you find on UMA (like it so much that I even invited some folks who I recognized here on Facebook -- I don't really know them, but I feel at least acquainted from the UMA). I hate going online and seeing tantrums and people disrespecting each other. Especially when they do so only because of the cowardice of anonymity one finds on the internet.
The web could be today's Library of Alexandria but most people just use it to call each other names.
At least there's the UMA. Kudos to admins.
Quote from: Wich2 on January 23, 2009, 04:43:48 PM
And who may have since been banned for his posts in this thread:
LOL That was wacky!
Quote from: Daimajin on January 23, 2009, 05:41:03 PM
The web could be today's Library of Alexandria
I remember something similar (some grand public good) being said about the potential of TV. That didn't work out too good, neither.
Quote from: Daimajin on January 23, 2009, 05:41:03 PM
At least there's the UMA. Kudos to admins.
Thank Heavens we have a governing authority here who recites General Patton's "Blood and Guts" speech in the shower every morning... I think this helps to keep our more dangerous passions in check.
Let's just hope that Terry continues to shower regularly!
"I remember something similar (some grand public good) being said about the potential of TV."
Long before that, early folks like D.W. Griffith & Lillian Gish thought that Motion Pictures would bring world brotherhood.
Still waiting...
Ok I just checked out the CHFB site concerning the FM comments (Bobby, pass the aspirins please). Thought about joining that site too, but not impressed with the way they tear each other down. Glad the UMA is user friendly, and everyone here has respect for one another.
Yes, i checked out the CHFB discussion too...It would appear the Israel-Palestine conflict stands a better chance of being settled before their Forry-Ferry dispute ever does. There's only one Famous Monsters, and no matter what you call the others that followed they are simply not it. If i start a newspaper tomorrow and call it the New York Times, i wouldn't expect anyone to confuse mine with the real deal, either.
Quote from: Gasport on January 24, 2009, 01:39:22 PM
There's only one Famous Monsters, and no matter what you call the others that followed they are simply not it.
Abso-totally! The FEELING of the original mag...the way it was put together, by the people who put it together...it had a special mojo, thoroughly unique. I don't know. It always just affected me this way, I guess.
Totally agree. It may have the same title, it may even copy the style, but it can never become the original. The Warren FM will forever stand apart from the newer versions.
Having worked on the ORIGINAL FM, I can only say that times were different back in the 60s. Nothing can recapture the innocence of youth. That being said, I still enjoy seeing a new cover with the FAMOUS MONSTERS logo on it and I'm 57. Speaking of which, I LOVED those unseen FM covers that were created for #s 70-79 and 192-199. BTW, I still have a copy of the original memo Jim Warren sent to all employees explaining why the numbering was changed.
Greg Bazaz
Quote from: grebaz on January 25, 2009, 01:51:16 PM
I still have a copy of the original memo Jim Warren sent to all employees explaining why the numbering was changed.
So, were you really fired?
(http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/7730/warrenmemoct5.jpg)
It's a small world isn't it. Yes, indeed Jim Warren did fire me, though that memo was signed MANY years after the fact. Short version, in 1970, after a year working on the Graveyard Examiner, my ego got a little too big for the boss to put up with. I was almost 19, heading off to college anyway so it was back to the real world. The longer version of the story is detailed in SCARY MONSTERS magazine #7 in case anyone is interested.
Quote from: grebaz on January 25, 2009, 02:26:20 PM
The longer version of the story is detailed in SCARY MONSTERS magazine #7
I'll have to dig that out and reread it. I'd completely forgotten about it.
Quote from: CreepysFan on January 24, 2009, 01:22:05 PM
Ok I just checked out the CHFB site concerning the FM comments (Bobby, pass the aspirins please). Thought about joining that site too, but not impressed with the way they tear each other down. Glad the UMA is user friendly, and everyone here has respect for one another.
Yup,the nastiness kept me from going there. Don't need that negativity spoiling something that has always brought me such good memories. And good memories are what this is all about. When our interest ceases to be a source of joy (so it can rather be used as a club to beat others over the head in some pathetic attempt at appearing superior) something is seriously amiss.
What I've found most disappointing about the CHFB site -- and one of the reasons I've stopped posting there -- is their willingness to mollycoddle Ferry and his defenders. I saw it happening again just today in their discussion about Ferry's new FREAKY magazine (which is apparently made up of scans of old PD comics that he lifted from the internet). There's quite a lot of bad news about this guy that's part of the public record, and yet the reaction from the CHFB admins is that it's all somehow a matter of opinion, and that he deserves our respect. Sorry, but respect is EARNED, and he's failed at just about every chance. What makes this all the more funny/sad is that the "Fang Gang" ::) has no problems whatsoever taking shots at the CHFB on the Filmland Classics boards -- and I'm sure that's only become more frequent ever since the board went private. UMA, by comparison, is a breath of fresh air.
Dear Scheisseler & gang-
"Ferry... There's quite a lot of bad news about this guy that's part of the public record"
I absolutely agree, and that's generally where I stand on the issue. BUT-
"and yet the reaction from the CHFB admins is that it's all somehow a matter of opinion"
- to be fair to them, I don't think that's what they're trying to do. I think they're just hoping to tamp down a bit of the flaming, toxic, oozing "ForryFerry War" that has done so much to harm fandom for so many years.
I would find the same, old, "Ferry is God, no, Ferry is Satan/Forry was God, no, Forry was Satan" thing amusing, if it weren't so sad. It's the same old silly idea that "the answer to one Extreme, is to counter it with another Extreme" thinking that helps make the world the mess that it is.
I admire and respect Forry's memory, and owe him a personal Monster Kid debt; but that doesn't mean that I gloss over his - "complexities"? - as a Human Being. And beyond that, even most of his honest friends will admit that he had one heck of an ego.
So what we had here, was a generally social guy with a great ego, up against what appears to be a generally anti-social guy and his great ego.
Quite apart from who was more "right" and who was more "wrong", that was probably destined never to work out!
Great weekend,
-Craig W.
Quote from: Wich2 on January 30, 2009, 11:44:10 AM
Ferry is Satan/Forry was God
Ya know, I think you got somethin' there! ;)
Quote from: Wich2 on January 30, 2009, 11:44:10 AM
to be fair to them, I don't think that's what they're trying to do. I think they're just hoping to tamp down a bit of the flaming, toxic, oozing "ForryFerry War" that has done so much to harm fandom for so many years.
I could see this if it weren't for the tendency to try to shut down
any negative comments whatsoever. The discussion about FREAKY, for example, was brought to a halt when one of the admins warned that those criticizing the magazine could be held legally responsible if it was determined that their comments hurt Ferry's business. I mean, come on -- you can't even have an opinion anymore? Are they going to shut down the section of the board that discusses current films, too, because someone might state that Saw V is crap?
Now maybe the ulterior motive is to get people to stop discussing Ferry AT ALL -- that I could get behind. :)
Quote from: Scheisseler on January 30, 2009, 02:51:22 PM
The discussion about FREAKY, for example, was brought to a halt when one of the admins warned that those criticizing the magazine could be held legally responsible if it was determined that their comments hurt Ferry's business.
I hope they don't mean because somebody posted where you could get most of the contents of the mag for free? Complete BS!
I don't know what they mean. I have a lot of professional respect for the moderator in question, so I just try to stay out of the discussions/debates/flame wars/whatever. But to me, if someone tries to sell a magazine made up of scans of old comics that they didn't even scan themselves, that's just not an issue there are two sides to. Any reputable publisher would be raked over the coals for that. Compare that behavior to, say, the amount of work that Dark Horse is putting into restoring CREEPY for their archives series. And then bear in mind that with a cover price of $9.95, FREAKY is costing you just as much per page, if not more.
Quote from: Wich2 on January 30, 2009, 11:44:10 AM
Dear Scheisseler & gang-
"Ferry... There's quite a lot of bad news about this guy that's part of the public record"
I absolutely agree, and that's generally where I stand on the issue. BUT-
"and yet the reaction from the CHFB admins is that it's all somehow a matter of opinion"
- to be fair to them, I don't think that's what they're trying to do. I think they're just hoping to tamp down a bit of the flaming, toxic, oozing "ForryFerry War" that has done so much to harm fandom for so many years.
I would find the same, old, "Ferry is God, no, Ferry is Satan/Forry was God, no, Forry was Satan" thing amusing, if it weren't so sad. It's the same old silly idea that "the answer to one Extreme, is to counter it with another Extreme" thinking that helps make the world the mess that it is.
I admire and respect Forry's memory, and owe him a personal Monster Kid debt; but that doesn't mean that I gloss over his - "complexities"? - as a Human Being. And beyond that, even most of his honest friends will admit that he had one heck of an ego.
So what we had here, was a generally social guy with a great ego, up against what appears to be a generally anti-social guy and his great ego.
Quite apart from who was more "right" and who was more "wrong", that was probably destined never to work out!
Great weekend,
-Craig W.
Ferry and Forry are moral equivalents?? Sorry, I don't buy it.
Regardless of anything else -- even the FM and other monster mag imitations/rip-offs (some defenders would call them "homages" I'm sure) -- the thing that made me loathe Ferry, that made me see him as a conniving, back-stabbing, ungrateful, unworthy rat-wretch-S.O.B. was when I read an LA Times blog about FJA's yard sale and his wistful smile as he obliged people with autographs as he sold the mementos of his life's work and passion, the irreplaceable pieces of film history, even his late wife's Jello molds. Such a sad, sad thing. I wish I had the link for the blog for you all, but a google search should turn it up.
Everyone's entitled to their opinions, but I really wonder what it is that makes some of those CHFB folks so defensive regarding Ferry. Is it just to be contrary or do they really believe that Ferry has done something fandom-worthy? Not being snide with that, I'm genuinely curious -- what is he credited with, besides reheating someone else's ideas?
Quote from: Scheisseler on January 30, 2009, 02:51:22 PM
The discussion about FREAKY, for example, was brought to a halt when one of the admins warned that those criticizing the magazine could be held legally responsible if it was determined that their comments hurt Ferry's business. I mean, come on -- you can't even have an opinion anymore? Are they going to shut down the section of the board that discusses current films, too, because someone might state that Saw V is crap?
Astonishing if this is true only because it's enabling the enabler. I say screw Ray Ferry and all of his business endeavors, and I say it out loud at any given opportunity. It's my right as an American to express my opinion as I see fit. And I do so without the slightest bit of hesitation or fear about what Ray Ferry has to say about it. I've already told Ray Ferry once to go screw himself regarding a previous threat he sent my way, and I'd tell him the same thing today if I had to. Lawyers and frivolous lawsuits don't scare me. Never have.
I agree with the comments that Craig made earlier. They were sound and fair. But a rat is a rat no matter how you dress it up.
Quote from: Daimajin on January 30, 2009, 06:22:50 PM
Regardless of anything else -- even the FM and other monster mag imitations/rip-offs (some defenders would call them "homages" I'm sure) -- the thing that made me loathe Ferry, that made me see him as a conniving, back-stabbing, ungrateful, unworthy rat-wretch-S.O.B. was when I read an LA Times blog about FJA's yard sale and his wistful smile as he obliged people with autographs as he sold the mementos of his life's work and passion, the irreplaceable pieces of film history, even his late wife's Jello molds. Such a sad, sad thing. I wish I had the link for the blog for you all, but a google search should turn it up.
Everyone's entitled to their opinions, but I really wonder what it is that makes some of those CHFB folks so defensive regarding Ferry. Is it just to be contrary or do they really believe that Ferry has done something fandom-worthy? Not being snide with that, I'm genuinely curious -- what is he credited with, besides reheating someone else's ideas?
Exactly........a lifetime of memories and beloved artifacts put up for grabs to protect a lifetime of work and reputation. Nice trade-off, precipitated by a weasel is who ONCE AGAIN demonstrating the same utter lack of integrity and imagination. Strafing the internet to profit off the work of others, just like he attempted to do to Forry through Famous Monsters.
See, Forry had a REASON for whatever ego he indulged. Forry CREATED. Forry INSPIRED. Forry ACHIEVED.
What has Ferry done to justify HIS ego?? Leeching off the imagination,hard work, and achievements of others is hardly justification for ego of any sort. Stripping an old man of a lifetime's work to raise the cash to defend his legacy doesn't justify any ego either.
Screw Ferry.
"Ferry and Forry are moral equivalents?? Sorry, I don't buy it."
Scatter, I don't either. And if you'll read my post again calmly, you'll see that I didn't say it. I said that they were both Human, not Demi-God - and I do stand by that.
"Is it just to be contrary or do they really believe that Ferry has done something fandom-worthy?"
Daimajin, some actually DO seem to believe that.That in sense, what he's doing is like what other folks have done with STAR TREK after Roddenberry. As it takes all kinds to take a world, I'll respect that they feel that. Though I don't.
"I've already told Ray Ferry once to go screw himself regarding a previous threat he sent my way"
Terry, I remember that - Oy! (That's around the time, I think, that I said that I wished the UMA could take over FM.)
To me, one of the saddest things is that is that Ferry took what could still be a fun MAGAZINE for a decent niche, and by such easily avoidable nonsense, shrunk it down essentially to a boutique FANZINE for a teeny clique. I agree with Ray and others who posit that FM could NEVER be what it once was - even if there is yet a THIRD incarnation (!). (Hey, even MAD is cutting back...)
But it's sad that the Brand is such diminished goods.
Great weekend,
-Craig W.
Quote from: Wich2 on January 30, 2009, 09:59:31 PM
But it's sad that the Brand is such diminished goods.
Yes, it is sad. And every time someone tries to resurrect FM, they just diminish it a little more. I wish everyone would give it a rest. Wait a decade or so, then bring it back. If you really must. But this does not feel like the right time for yet another "glorious return of FM." I would feel the same way even if Forry himself were alive and in charge. To the multiple people who say they own a piece of the FM legacy: please, let the poor thing recuperate, convalesce and heal its wounds.
Craig, as I recall you summed it up succinctly by stating it was merely an old social guy with a big ego against a young anti-social guy with a big ego. Apart from the revisionist history, that smacks of moral equivalency just a tad.
I confess though that I'm at somewhat of a loss as to how one determines if another reads calmly.
Scatter, I meant no offense - just trying to be clear.
I guess, overall, I just get weary of mudfights among adults. And at some point, it gets to the place where it doesn't even matter how much right one side or another has the throw the mud.
It still just dirties up the place.
(But then, I think the Ultra-Partisan Politics of recent years has hurt my country - what do I know?)
Great weekend,
-Craig Wichman
The only thing I agree on is, Whom ever said. I would like to kick Ferry in the nuts. >:(
Quote from: hhwolfman on January 30, 2009, 11:20:08 PM
The only thing I agree on is, Whom ever said. I would like to kick Ferry in the nuts. >:(
I think that was Forry. ;)
Quote from: Wich2 on January 30, 2009, 10:38:11 PM
Scatter, I meant no offense - just trying to be clear.
I guess, overall, I just get weary of mudfights among adults. And at some point, it gets to the place where it doesn't even matter how much right one side or another has the throw the mud.
It still just dirties up the place.
(But then, I think the Ultra-Partisan Politics of recent years has hurt my country - what do I know?)
Great weekend,
-Craig Wichman
No offense taken. I agree about the mudfights, and I certainly have no beef whatsoever with you friend. That's why I steer clear of the site in question. The attempt to paint the Ferry/Forry fiasco in neutral pigments is another reason I don't post there.
I don't doubt that the motives there may be to simply quell the lingering unpleasantness, but to my mind the only means of doing so would be to engage in rank revisionism (which is precisely what's happening on that MB). I like my history bloody where it was actually bloody.
Stampp wrote that knowledge of the past is the key to understanding the present. To truly understand our present estimation of both Forry and Ferry, one needs the past told accurately. Peace that comes at the expense of truth is a charade.
Quote from: hhwolfman on January 30, 2009, 11:20:08 PM
The only thing I agree on is, Whom ever said. I would like to kick Ferry in the nuts. >:(
Me too.
>I like my history bloody where it was actually bloody.<
Scatter, me too. (An appropo sentiment in this Lincoln Bicentennial year; I'm putting together several events in honor of THAT beloved icon - but never loosing sight of the point you make...)
BUT I also believe in the very necessary-for-progress idea of allowing wounds to heal, and not contuinually picking off scabs (which can become an obsessive behavior.)
Best,
-Craig
Quote from: Wich2 on January 31, 2009, 11:30:31 AM
>I like my history bloody where it was actually bloody.<
Scatter, me too. (An appropo sentiment in this Lincoln Bicentennial year; I'm putting together several events in honor of THAT beloved icon - but never loosing sight of the point you make...)
BUT I also believe in the very necessary-for-progress idea of allowing wounds to heal, and not contuinually picking off scabs (which can become an obsessive behavior.)
Best,
-Craig
BTW Craig,I'm a fellow Lincoln devotee. What events are you creating, and in what capacity?? What's your connection with Lincoln if you don't mind my asking.
Dear Scatter-
"BTW Craig,I'm a fellow Lincoln devotee."
Well howdy, bub!
>What events are you creating,<
-Copland's LINCOLN PORTRAIT (probable; Spring; Episcopal Actor's Guild benefit, NYC)
-Sandburg's LINCOLN: MAN OF STEEL AND VELVET (tentative; Spring; Actor's Temple benefit, NYC)
-(Yet Untitled) LINCOLN piece (Summer; my hometown library, Defiance, Ohio)
-GOOD FRIDAY, 1865 (Ongoing syndication)
http://www.prx.org/pieces/23303-good-friday-1865-lincolns-last-day (http://www.prx.org/pieces/23303-good-friday-1865-lincolns-last-day)
-???
>and in what capacity??<
Actor, producer, chief-cook-and-bottle-washer!
>What's your connection with Lincoln if you don't mind my asking.<
Admiration and love, since childhood.
Best,
-Craig Wichman
The Chicago Historical Society owns the bed that Lincoln died in, which was drawn in many illustrations of the day, and I think it was photographed, too.
Anyway, that, and the assassination relics that are in the Smithsonian are probably the most stirring museum artifacts I have ever seen. Unreal. Like seeing the Holy Grail or something.
"The Chicago Historical Society owns the bed that Lincoln died in"
In the Peterson House, across from Ford's in DC where he died, the bed's a replacement. But when I first visited there in the mid-'80's, they still had the very bloodsoaked pillow his head rested on.
-Craig
Quote from: Wich2 on January 31, 2009, 01:16:57 PM
Dear Scatter-
"BTW Craig,I'm a fellow Lincoln devotee."
Well howdy, bub!
>What events are you creating,<
-Copland's LINCOLN PORTRAIT (probable; Spring; Episcopal Actor's Guild benefit, NYC)
-Sandburg's LINCOLN: MAN OF STEEL AND VELVET (tentative; Spring; Actor's Temple benefit, NYC)
-(Yet Untitled) LINCOLN piece (Summer; my hometown library, Defiance, Ohio)
-GOOD FRIDAY, 1865 (Ongoing syndication)
http://www.prx.org/pieces/23303-good-friday-1865-lincolns-last-day (http://www.prx.org/pieces/23303-good-friday-1865-lincolns-last-day)
-???
>and in what capacity??<
Actor, producer, chief-cook-and-bottle-washer!
>What's your connection with Lincoln if you don't mind my asking.<
Admiration and love, since childhood.
Best,
-Craig Wichman
Well, that sounds very interesting. Your appeal to the better angels of our nature is certainly understandable now LOL!!
I remember going to DC and standing outside that little box in Ford's Theater, seeing what was in his pockets that night, and the gun and bullet that stilled his magnificent mind and heart. I wonder what might have been had Lincoln been free to turn his talents from prosecuting a war to other endeavors??
Hi all. I was strolling the 'net looking for something else and stumbled across this.
I've been reading some of the posts here and I see some old friends from CHFB are here as well.
I wondered if any of you had had the misfortune of seeing the latest crap from Ray Ferry's camp.
He's got some friends begging for money.
This in itself isn't newsworthy of course, there's usually some scam somewhere with Ray Ferry behind it, but this one has been permitted to stand at CHFB in the interests of fair play I suppose. Under the guise of Connie having had a stroke, and the fact that they are being evicted from the house they are renting because they haven't been able to pay the rent, there's a general attitude of let bygones be bygones over there that sticks in my craw something awful. And when someone suggested that there was no way they'd assist because it was Ray Ferry, that person was banned and his post deleted.
Have I missed something somewhere?
Welcome to the group Jessie!
I try not to comment on this subject to much. I have dealt with Forry and have dealt with Ray. I know which one I preferred (Uncle Forry). I find FM #250 a farce. I do not wish any bad to happen to anyone, but at this point, I have a hard time believing anything they say that happens to them and maybe that's why it doesn't affect me one way or the other.
As for the banning, I would prefer to know what lead up to it before I coment. I know it takes a lot to be banned here unless you are a spammer. I do enjoy visiting CHFB and think David is trying to be fair to all.
BK
If she is ill, I hope she recovers.
Quote from: michblk on January 30, 2010, 10:37:42 AM
I find FM #250 a farce.
I haven't seen it (and probably won't), so what makes it so?
And yes, it is too late for Ferry to expect anyone to believe him at this point.
Ray Ferry.........meet Karma.
Reminiscent of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"--though I tend to feel, in this case, it's the jackal who cried wolf. It would be very difficult to believe anything Mr. Ferry says, at this point.
Quote from: ScatterRay Ferry.........meet Karma.
My thoughts exactly.
My goodness, Mr. Ferry certainly has built up a lot of good will in this community, hasn't he?
Thanks for the welcome! I'll be sniffing around....
Hey! You guys use the same forum software that I use at
Mondo Cult! Cool.
Maybe someone can tell me why I can't convince my other smileys to work at my place.....
Hi Jessie-- Good to see you here!
Max
Max!
Sure is good to see home folk.
Jessie-
You're long overdue here at this good place manned by great people.
I am going on the assumption that Connie has indeed had serious health issues. On that level, I am happy to give her the prayers asked for.
But on the overall issue of trusting Ray's word, he has indeed fouled those waters - effectively, repeatedly, and even recently.
To me, the saddest part of the whole past FM mess, was that it_did_not_need_to_happen. Yes, there are a tiny group of folks who believe that Forry walked on water; and to them, even Moses or Lincoln would have been an unworthy successor.
But mainly, the problem was that Ray shot himself in the foot - generally, with a blunderbuss - whenever he had a chance. And when he didn't have that chance, he made one.
Just sad.
-Craig
Quote from: Mike Scott on January 30, 2010, 11:05:15 AM
I haven't seen it (and probably won't), so what makes it so?
Definition for farce from Encarta
- absurd situation: a ridiculous situation in which everything goes wrong or becomes a sham
BK
Welcome, Jessie--at CHFB I'm Cushings View. Not there a great deal, but I lurk!
Robert, aka typhooforme, aka Cushings View
Forry never walked on water, but the way Ray walked was crooked.
Maybe somebody here knows, and maybe I've got it all wrong. And I hope I do. But why does the CHFB have a reputation for providing sanctuary to Ray Ferry? This isn't the first time I've heard this. I know the CHFB guys fairly well and respect them a great deal, so I'm sure there's much more to the story than just Forry vs Ferry / Ferry vs Forry. Maybe David Colton can chime in here with the facts and set everyone straight once and for all?
Quote from: Wich2 on January 31, 2009, 11:30:31 AM
>I like my history bloody where it was actually bloody.<
Scatter, me too. (An appropo sentiment in this Lincoln Bicentennial year; I'm putting together several events in honor of THAT beloved icon - but never loosing sight of the point you make...)
BUT I also believe in the very necessary-for-progress idea of allowing wounds to heal, and not contuinually picking off scabs (which can become an obsessive behavior.)
Best,
-Craig
I couldn't agree more. I'm an ex-pat Southerner with some peeves about how my home state has been portrayed in the media, but I don't keep trying to fight the damn Civil War endlessly, like a few obsessive Southern friends I knew liked to do. Geez.
Look, I know enough about Forry to know he was a very flawed person. But I think Ferry's far more flawed, and Forry will remain a cherished figure to me and Ferry can go jump in a lake--I think he's a nasty fool. BUT-- do I think it serves any purpose to keep fighting the Forry/Ferry FM fight here or at CHFB? Hell no!!
Let anyone who likes Ferry and his FM or other mags say so without being insulted. Let anyone who wants to say they think Forry was screwed by Ferry say so. BUT JUST ONCE. Sheesh, how many times must it each person chime in with the same comments?
With real, abiding affection and respect to my friends here, I have no truck with anyone saying they want to injure anyone else, for ANY reason. In PUBLIC, where people disagree and don't know each other, it's not funny. It's immoral and illegal. A public forum should respect the opinions and safety of all. I will remove any more such posts and lock this thread if they appear.
Quote from: raycastile on January 22, 2009, 11:24:41 PM
That's why FM should have stuck with what it did best. In its younger days, did FM cover the Sean Connery Bond films? Maybe they did, I don't know. I imagine they covered some new sci-fi, like 2001 or Silent Running. I'm sure they gave Planet of the Apes plenty of coverage. But did they cover Diabolik or the Batman and Green Hornet TV shows? I seem to remember them covering the Doc Savage film. In any case, Superman and Roger Moore's James Bond felt all wrong in Famous Monsters of Filmland. As a kid, I remember thinking those articles were out of place. Starlog was the magazine for those films.
That was my opinion too. Classic horror films for a few years seemed passe to the public at large, but not to a Monster Kid like me.
Quote from: JessieLilley on January 30, 2010, 01:06:41 AM
I wondered if any of you had had the misfortune of seeing the latest crap from Ray Ferry's camp.
He's got some friends begging for money.
This in itself isn't newsworthy of course, there's usually some scam somewhere with Ray Ferry behind it, but this one has been permitted to stand at CHFB in the interests of fair play I suppose. Under the guise of Connie having had a stroke, and the fact that they are being evicted from the house they are renting because they haven't been able to pay the rent, there's a general attitude of let bygones be bygones over there that sticks in my craw something awful. And when someone suggested that there was no way they'd assist because it was Ray Ferry, that person was banned and his post deleted.
Have I missed something somewhere?
Jessie, you're a friend, but the more I think about it, the more I think the CHFB was right. Do we know for a fact that Ray is having friends begging for money? If not, if they're doing outta friendship on their own, that's a pretty libelous charge.
If it's a fact that they are being evicted and Connie has had a stroke, then allowing someone to say something cruel is just ugly. I DO NOT LIKE RAY FERRY AND I THINK HE BURNED HIS OWN BRIDGES. But for the sake of common decency, allowing unsympathetic remarks to stand in a time of someone else's crisis is just not wise.
"But why does the CHFB have a reputation for providing sanctuary to Ray Ferry?"
Beloved Bossman, from what I can see based on several year's experience (Friend Max finally corraled me over there!), that reputation is not warranted.
If David and the Mods there are to be faulted, it is for being TOO "balanced" (by their lights; we're all human) on this issue.
Their credo seems to be roughly what Max describes above: you can post that you like or dislike Forry and his work; you can post that you like or dislike Ferry and his work (and I have seen plenty of all four types there.)
But you CAN'T be vicious about either of the above men, or their minions.
I've seen that tried many times (which I have to agree yet again with Max, I don't see the profit in.) And when either type acolyte's voice raises to a scream, they generally stop it.
Which, of course, is then complained about by either very passionate side (take your pick) as "unfair to us!!!"
Best,
-Craig
QuoteDo we know for a fact that Ray is having friends begging for money? If not, if they're doing outta friendship on their own, that's a pretty libelous charge.
Very well DSH, I will amend my comments as follows:
QuoteIt appears to me, and this is just my opinion you understand, that he's got some friends begging for money.
Dear Craig, well stated and easily understood. However, I think many of the negative remarks or attacks made towards Ferry were not made in a sense of wanting to profit by exposing Ferry's shortcomings, but rather out of passion for Uncle 4E. Passion for the man, his legacy (FM magazine, which was basically hijacked from him), and his life long contributions to our hobby and fandom. Most folks here will defend that to the bitter end. Without 4E, this very forum and others like it, might not even be here at all. But you know all that.
Most of us are able to move onward, and sometimes with forgiveness, after injustices occur. As we all should. But asking folks to refrain from throwing stones at a man that singlehandedly raped and pillaged another man's lifetime accomplishment, of which we all grew up with and hold close to our hearts ... well, that won't come easy, if ever at all.
Still, with all that having been said, we too here at UMA will not allow threats and the endless onslaught of disparaging remarks about Ferry, or anybody else for that matter. It's not healthy. Anger is not healthy. It's a cancer that if left alone to run amok will only continue to grow and tear down. And clearly, Ferry isn't worth that price.
Thank you Craig, Jessie and Terry.
We're not talking about forgiveness here, just consideration of what is best said in public and what is best said in private. And maintaining some perspective.
When Connie Bean first posted on the CHFB I remember emailing David and Gary to discuss the potential ramifications of her and Ray being members. Would the CHFB be seen as pro-Ferry for allowing them to post? What would our other members think, not to mention our then-nemesis the Scarlet Street boards? Would letting them stay be worth the headaches of refereeing arguments and attacks that could come? We weren't sure what to expect. However, we came to the conclusion that as long as they followed the rules like everyone else, it would be wrong to single them out and ban them from joining. And letting them join would give people direct communication with them and give them a chance to respond personally to things being said and we thought allowing that open communication would be a good thing as long as we could keep it from erupting. Also, some of our members bought and enjoyed the new FM and were interested in info about it. There was just no legitimate reason to tell Connie she couldn't talk about FM on our board.
If we have been seen as giving them some kind of sanctuary, it probably is because we have made every effort to be as objective as possible. We didn't give them extra favor, we just made an effort to put personal feeling aside and give them the same consideration we would any other member. That was our job as administrators.
As for the current situation, I was aware of Ray and Connie's building financial problems before it hit crisis level so I have no reason to doubt the reports of the eviction or Connie's stroke. As moderators, we have made no special effort to promote this cause or encourage people to help them, but we don't feel we should block the information from going out, or allow others to post things that would intentionally hurt the efforts to help them.
And for the record, the member who got banned has pushed the limits many times in the past. His post in the Connie Bean illness thread even stated that he knew it would be deleted. To me that's the same as posting, "I know the rules but choose to ignore them. Please ban me". Life is just too short.
Kerry Gammill
Thanks for posting that, Kerry.
You describe the "mod reasoning" that, as I tried write above, I feel that I've seen over at our sister site.
Best,
-Craig
Kerry-- Thank you indeed for posting. Nice to read what goes on "behind the scenes." Having met you and Gary, and knowing David (taraco), I know you guys always work to keep a reasonable balance.
The mods here, including myself, are pretty openly pro-Forry, but that's an editorial choice, not a necessity for a good Monster Kid forum. What IS a necessity, and you guys always try to maintain it, is a basic level of civility. Kudos!
Thanks again for posting here.
Thank you Kerry for sharing your comments. Much appreciated. Your explanation (though none was ever needed), only exemplifies the great team of administrators who make the CHFB what it is today. I've always considered us close allies in monster kid crime. And dear friends as well. Salute!
Kerry, thank you. You have always been a most reasonable and sensible monster kid. I appreciate your candor.