A quick explanation, folks – this discussion began on another thread with the following comment by EYE OF KHARIS:
"Bill Lemon was quoted that he was given "a Frankenstein toy" to base his acetate sculpture on for the Aurora kit - some have speculated it was the Marx windup Frankie, but that didn't come out until 1963. The first Aurora longbox Frankie kit came out in 1961, so what was the toy Lemon was given?"
What ensues has now been moved here:
The notion that Bill Lemon used an existing Frankenstein toy to design the Aurora kit seems most unlikely. This argument surfaced on a thread at CHFB a while ago and was based on claims by the toy historian, Thomas Graham. After considerable discussion, it was concluded that Graham's speculation was founded more on a desire to embellish the story he was telling than on any actual evidence.
You can check the details here:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/777 (http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/777)
Quote from: roheimiana on January 11, 2008, 02:54:21 PM
The notion that Bill Lemon used an existing Frankenstein toy to design the Aurora kit seems most unlikely.
Thanx for the link, very interesting thread but... hmmm, I dunno. I was referring to
this article that's basically an interview with Lemon himself, in which he seems pretty lucid regarding details:
http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=scan0008tk4.jpg
http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=scan0009ti4.jpg
While yes, it is Graham's speculation the toy was the Frankie windup, it's Lemon himself who sez he was given a toy. He's pretty specific on other details in the article, so why doubt the validity of that particular claim?
Plus, think about it, isn't it unlikely
as an artist Lemon would say he copied a design if he did not do so...?
My best guess after reading the CHFB thread (and especially considering Ted Newsom's 1961 correspondence with Marx stating that a windup was already being developed) is that there was a prototype already done for the Marx windup and that's what Lemon was given. The toy just wasn't officially released until 1963.
Further thoughts and speculations?
EYE OF KHARIS, thanks so much for your link in return! I've been trying to get a copy of the Lemon interview for ages and now I have it. This has truly made my day. ;D
A couple of quick reactions.
First, the discussion at the CHFB was based on Graham's comments in his Aurora book(s), not on direct statements from Lemon himself, so this article potentially casts a different light on things. Nevertheless, I'm still concerned about the fact that Graham seems to be a rather sloppy scholar and I wonder how much editing, interpolation, and even interpretation went on with the interview material presented. Unfortunately, this problem is at its greatest when it comes to the claim about the Marx walker. This statement appears in brackets (the only ones in the article!) and I doubt Mr. Lemon was talking in brackets... so I assume this is Graham's own addition, perhaps even one of his own pet theories. If so, for the extensive reasons offered at the CHFB, the notion appears to be a pretty shaky one.
Second, the Aurora Frankie existed as a dummy box well before Lemon made the kit prototype. Is it possible he was following the graphic on the box, rather than an actual toy? I don't know but this seems so much more likely to me, particularly when there were so many IMAGES of the Frankenstein monster circulating at the time, thanks to Shock, Famous Monsters, Universal publicity and the like.
Third and most important, no one here seems to know anything about a Frankenstein toy which existed prior to the Aurora model. So what in the world could it have been? Is Ray Castile or some other major collector hiding something from us which would be as rare and valuable as the missing footage from Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man? (Just a joke, Ray... unless you really do have something in one of those boxes!)
It's too bad Bill Lemon died in 1994 and, to the best of my knowledge, only did interviews with Graham during his lifetime. Otherwise, we'd be a lot closer to an answer here....
Memories tend to meld together, especially things that don't seem important at the time... we're talking about the recollection of an elderly fellow thinking back on something he'd done 30+ years earlier to earn a paycheck. 30 years ago, I got my first job, at Six Flags Over Texas. If you ask me today which attractions I worked on, I could tell you some of them, and perhaps relate a few anecdotes, but I wouldn't swear that any of it was accurate. What were you doing at your job 30 years ago?
There weren't any Frankenstein toys prior to the Aurora Model. That was the first...
Quote from: Toy Ranch on January 11, 2008, 06:13:00 PM
There weren't any Frankenstein toys prior to the Aurora Model. That was the first...
If you mean there weren't any Frankenstein toys
released prior to the Aurora Model, I agree.
And that's the whole key right there - the copyright dates on the boxes would correspond to the
release year of the toy or model.
Good points all, but it is still very conceivable - and likely - to me that there could have been a prototype pattern for the windup in 1960/61, possibly even done right at HMS where Lemon worked at the time. Especially if it were "already in development" and "would be available soon" as per Ted Newsom's 1961 letter from Marx.
And ROHEIMIANA, I'm very happy I could make your day with the article!
Now, Lemon may no longer be with us, but anyone know who sculpted the Marx Windup or the history of that toy? Was there a delay in getting it released?
I can't think of what toy Bill Lemon could be talking about...oh wait, I have it! It must be this rubber Frankie from 1959 which looks exactly like the Aurora Frank!
(http://thegalleryofmonstertoys.com/msc/rubberfrankfake.jpg)
This is undoubtably the toy in question! The only markings are a bunny logo on its back.
;)
Did the windup predate the batt op???
The Frankenstein Robot is based on the chassis for Marx's Mr Mercury Robot, which debuted in 1961. The 1961 version was blue and had plastic arms. In 1962, it went to metal arms. Then in 1963 the paint scheme changed and it was gold colored.
This is the 1961 version:
(http://www.robotisland.com/images/mrmercuryweb.jpg)
This is the gold one that came out in 1963:
(http://www.ozziesrobots.com/af249410.jpg)
1963 toy catalog
(http://danefield.com/alpha/forums/uploads/post-4-1088707055.jpg)
Sears catalog of 1965 and the gold Mr Mercury is still going strong.
(http://danefield.com/alpha/forums/uploads/monthly_06_2007/post-143-1182606147.jpg)
This was not a big design change... they made the chest plain and added a plastic head to an already existing robot. Garloo's patent number is 3,199,249 and he appeared in the Alden's catalog in 1961.
Quote from: Toy Ranch on January 11, 2008, 06:46:15 PM
Did the windup predate the batt op???
Y'know, I wondered that myself... both boxes have a copyright of 1963... and the Aurora kit sure has the straight arms of the batt op instead of the bent arms of the w/u... hmmmmm
First, I'm entirely on the side of the Unbelievers here. Second, I suspect I'm about to offer a real red herring but I'll risk it anyway. Third, I enjoy science fiction.
A couple of years ago, our own Leader (fmofmpls) posted an article on his website about what is most likely a FAKE Marx prototype, one for a DOCTOR Frankenstein robot. Here's the link:
http://castlefamous.blogspot.com/2006/08/is-this-doctor-quack.html
(http://castlefamous.blogspot.com/2006/08/is-this-doctor-quack.html)
...and here's a picture of the toy in question:
(http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii98/roheimiana/Proto201.jpg)
Now, as is pretty obvious, this is nothing more than a repainted b/o Frankie, certainly not the sales sample for a new product it was claimed to be at the time it was auctioned for a pretty penny.
But here's my question. Wouldn't an in-house prototype at a '60s toy company start out with some simple rejigging of an existing product, much like the above fake? And, since Bobby has pointed out that the Marx Frankie body was based on the 1961 Mr. Mercury, mightn't someone – again, in-house at Marx – have been playing around with a proto-Frankie design using Mr. Mercury? Might Lemon somehow have seen this... particularly in light of the usually reliable Ted Newsom's comments on the above thread at the CHFB?
I overwhelmingly doubt it -- but it's the only hypothesis which somehow reconciles Lemon's memories (assuming they were not confused by time or fabricated by Graham) with the available evidence. Also, it keeps a small amount of hope alive for our tana-drinking friend, Mr. EYE... and I'm presently in his debt.
Quote from: roheimiana on January 11, 2008, 08:08:30 PM
But here's my question. Wouldn't an in-house prototype at a ‘60s toy company start out with some simple rejigging of an existing product?
Seems plausible - so anyone know when this MARX windup come out?
(http://universalmonsterarmy.com/forum/gallery/0/1_10_12_07_10_05_05_1.jpg)
(http://universalmonsterarmy.com/forum/gallery/0/1_10_12_07_10_09_52_0.jpg)
Bobby, do you own those catalogs? I love seeing those pictures of the Kong, Yeti and that hand. Is that the Cragston hand?
Quote from: Toy Ranch on January 11, 2008, 07:04:35 PM
The Frankenstein Robot is based on the chassis for Marx's Mr Mercury Robot, which debuted in 1961. The 1961 version was blue and had plastic arms. In 1962, it went to metal arms. Then in 1963 the paint scheme changed and it was gold colored.
This is the 1961 version:
This is the gold one that came out in 1963:
1963 toy catalog
Sears catalog of 1965 and the gold Mr Mercury is still going strong.
This was not a big design change... they made the chest plain and added a plastic head to an already existing robot. Garloo's patent number is 3,199,249 and he appeared in the Alden's catalog in 1961.
No I don't Raymond. I used to own copies of those but sold off my toy catalog collection. I found those pics over at the robot collector group. Yes, that is the Cragstan Creeping Crawling Hand!
Well, I don't know about the "Dr Frankenstein" robot. I've heard all the stories, participated in the discussions, and it could very well be a prototype Dr Frankenstein robot but if it is... then it was a stupid idea and it's a stupid toy, IMO. It's no surprise that they didn't build it. But they did throw-together prototypes... like the Monster Mansion playset. They painted up a Robin Hood castle and threw in a bunch of MPC figures and borrowed some accessories from other playsets and modified some of them and they had a prototype.
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1276/1155669217_94f48b6bf4_o.jpg)
This isn't something that "might" have been a prototype, it is verified and today lives in the Marx Museum. They used this cobbled-together set as a sales sample
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1275/1155669571_2858b6c6bb_o.jpg)
Marx had amazing playsets and intricate accessories and wonderful figure sculpts that were totally original. The finished version of this would have been radically different (and even way more wonderful) if they'd made it. The point is that they made prototypes of stuff all the time, and while there is reason to believe that is a fake... there's better prototypes someone could fake if they were intent on doing that, and it's not out of bounds for Marx to have picked up a Frankbot and painted it. My guess is that if it is not a fake, then it was probably made as a gag or something.
Which brings us back around to this Aurora question...
As far as the goofy frank goes... dunno what year that was made... have any idea when this was made?
(http://i24.ebayimg.com/03/i/000/d1/bc/b563_1.JPG)
How about the later version with plastic head and arms, but metal chest?
It makes sense to me that the 1963 reworking of the Mr Mercury and the 1963 introduction of the Frankenstein Robot are related to one another.
Quote from: Ted Newsom(*at*)CHFBI know for a fact that after first seeing a TV commercial for "Great Garloo" (which would be 1961, when it came out; I was eight), I wrote a letter to Marx toys complete with a "diagram drawing" saying it would be a great idea if they came out with a toy Frankenstein "... with the same wirring [sic]as Great Garloo." About three weeks later I received a reply from Marx (To "Master Teddy Newsom," no less. One does not forget, Herr Baron, a letter from a big toy company, on letterhead paper, no less) thanking me for my interest and saying they were already in the process of producing such an item, and it should be available soon. I'm not taking credit for them doing it, or suggesting they ripped off a little kid-- but these details stick out in my mind clearly. A couple months later, there it was in the winter/Xmas Sears Catalogue, top-left part of a left-hand page, right next to Great Garloo itself. So logically this would be winter, 1961.
With all due respect to Ted Newsom, whose posts I have read and are very well composed and knowledgable... the Frankenstein Robot did not appear in the 1961 Sears catalog, it appeared in the 1963 Sears catalog, for the first time. Garloo was on store shelves for 3 or 4 years at least, and Garloo did debut in 1961.
And once again that memory thing comes into play. It was a very long time ago. Memories, even very clear ones, are not that dependable.
These were posted later in the CHFB thread.
(http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/4637/aurstrngmd2.jpg)
(http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/3526/frankx2hb1.png)
Thomas Graham and I have exchanged emails in the past - in an effort to help clarify things, I've asked him if he can possibly provide any additional details or insight into this mystery... looking forward to his response.
Those pics leave little doubt that the Aurora Frankenstein was indeed patterned, if not strongly influenced, after the Glenn Strange monster. Then again, what Frankenstein monster toy from the 1960s wasn't? Not many, if any at all.
Hello. Tom Graham here. It looks like I may be in error on the connection between the Marx wind-up Frankenstein walker and the Aurora model. Bill Lemon quite definitely did tell me that he was given a "toy" as one of the references for development of the model prototype. For a long time I had no idea what that toy could have been, but then I found an article [which, of course, I can't locate now] stating that the Marx walker was released in the 1950s. I believed the article, having no expertese in Marx toys myself. If the Marx toy was not reliesed until 1963, I think it doubtful that the relationship of the two items is Marx to Aurora, and is more likely Aurora to Marx. I am curious about the rubber Frankenstein with the bunny logo on its back. It would be interesting to confirm if it pre-dates 1960. Thanks for this interesting discussion. There are several errors in the "Aurora Model Kits" book that will need correcting in the next edition.
The rubber Frankenstein with the bunny logo is very curious indeed...very curious...
Quote from: docplastic on January 12, 2008, 03:19:25 PM
I am curious about the rubber Frankenstein with the bunny logo on its back. It would be interesting to confirm if it pre-dates 1960. Thanks for this interesting discussion. There are several errors in the "Aurora Model Kits" book that will need correcting in the next edition.
The Kitahara book Yesterday's Toys Vol 3 "Robots, Spaceships, and Monsters" date the batt op and windup Frankenstein toys as 1950's, along with the first Blushing Frankenstein and the Mons-Turn toy. That was probably the source of the 50's date.
Quote from: raycastile on January 12, 2008, 03:32:25 PM
The rubber Frankenstein with the bunny logo is very curious indeed...very curious...
Raymond, I thought you were joking about that, and that it was one of those rubber casts of the Aurora models from Mexico. Not the case?
As I just told Tom in PM, it is a joke.
Raymond, I must respectfully object to your "curious" post. Tom was asking a serious question and you took advantage of the situation by trying to trick him. You should treat our new members with more courtesy and respect. Otherwise, they may not bother to join UMA. I have said my peace.
Tomland Mummy, you are just a toy and do not understand the subtleties of human social interaction. In future, please confine your online activities to conversations with your own kind. Mego Zé, that goes for you, too. Save it. I do not want to hear it. Toys are for collecting, not for talking.
Pobre Sr. Mummy, o humano com o barba é mau a você. Eu pensei que você dito este homem era uma pessoa amável. Ha! Agora, eu compreendo porque você tem sempre um "frown" em sua cara.
And why would an Egyptian Mummy understand Spanish? Toys, sheesh. These guys are getting a bit big headed for their shelves Ray. May I suggest a couple fire crackers or roman candles to keep them in line.
HA! And Bill Lemon didn't sculpt either of 'em!!
Quote from: fmofmpls on January 12, 2008, 01:11:18 PM
Those pics leave little doubt that the Aurora Frankenstein was indeed patterned, if not strongly influenced, after the Glenn Strange monster. Then again, what Frankenstein monster toy from the 1960s wasn't? Not many, if any at all.
Wait a minute...
I'm, not expert...but the BOX art was obviously influenced by Glenn's photo...AND an earlt Karloff Prototype with the odd 'flesh horns' and while the model's POSE might be Strange, it's a Bride of Frankenstein KARLOFF model...(burned hair, exposed clamps, burns on his cheek and head...and the tattered burned clothes).
The actual MODEL face is from Karloff in The Bride...not Strange.
Anyone?
I posted this elsewhere in another thread but when I watched it again I noticed about .010 into it on the counter is this Wolfman pic . It had to be the one used for Aurora and Bama for the Wolfman model and box art .
I never saw it before now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJelFr0hHj4
(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/61/aurorawolfmandw9.jpg)
Tom
>the BOX art was obviously influenced by Glenn's photo...AND an earlt Karloff Prototype with the odd 'flesh horns' ...
The actual MODEL face is from Karloff in The Bride<
Yessir, Prof.
Best,
-Craig W.
:)
I have most of this information posted on my website, check it out if you'd like.
( http://members.aol.com/houseofdracula )
Here's Frankenstein
(http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/frankensteinlong.gif) (http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/frankphoto01.gif)
(http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/frankphoto02.gif)
Dracula
(http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/draculalong.gif) (http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/dracphoto.gif)
The Wolfman
(http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/wolfmanlong.gif) (http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/wolfmanphoto.gif)
The Phantom
(http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/phantomlong.gif) (http://members.aol.com/chiefkancamagus/boxart/phantomphoto.gif)
Mike
Great photos. There's no mistaking this evidence. These are indeed the pics that influenced the box art, and with the exception of the Wolf Man, the pose of the models themselves. Cool stuff! Thanks for sharing HOD.
Cool UMA shoulder patch!
Quote from: Mike Scott on May 31, 2008, 05:37:02 PM
Cool UMA shoulder patch!
Glad you like it Mike. It's taken from the KISS Army fan club that was popular back in the 70s. I modified it of course with Photoshop.
Quote from: fmofmpls on June 02, 2008, 06:54:07 AM
It's taken from the KISS Army fan club
I shoulda guessed it! :D