Aug 15
Good Show Sir Comments: The original movie title “Burn Wife Burn” didn’t focus group well.
You might remember this from here.
Good Show Sir Comments: The original movie title “Burn Wife Burn” didn’t focus group well.
You might remember this from here.
August 15th, 2017 at 10:54 am
This exercise routine* will bring you closer together as a couple
*Graveyards only required if you are both really into that sort of thing or if he is extremely tolerant of your Twilight obsession.
Horror, who said horror?
August 15th, 2017 at 11:12 am
“Room for one more?”
August 15th, 2017 at 12:40 pm
There is no way that those feet could ever be attached to that torso!
Although points for the composition, he’s a right gentleman to offer to carry his lady friend over rough terrain when she’s only heels to wear.
August 15th, 2017 at 1:02 pm
“Conjure Wife?” In my day we just called ’em Russian mail-order brides!!
August 15th, 2017 at 1:27 pm
@dswbt Well, he is bringing her to the cemetery. Severe spinal trauma might explain a lot.
August 15th, 2017 at 2:24 pm
@Tom: no, it’s the imperative form of the verb:
“You WILL conjure wife! Your wife WILL turn into witch! And then witch WILL burn! BURN WITCH BURN!” etc.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:15 pm
The sequel Float Witch Float was a flop
August 15th, 2017 at 3:28 pm
That’s supposed to be Peter Wyngarde? It looks like Lonnie Donegan.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:42 pm
Christopher Lee rocks this cover.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrjZOtnCltc
August 15th, 2017 at 5:51 pm
If you take a screen shot of this cover and turn it upside down she looks like Supergirl flying through the air carrying him on her back. A more interesting scene, in my opinion, and one better suited to the expression on her face as well as the position of those feet.
August 15th, 2017 at 7:37 pm
Now that is one messy and convoluted title text. Publishers should settle for ONE title.
Imagine a similar mess with a more recent title:
“Stephen King’s classic story of horror IT now made into a major motion picture DEATHCLOWN starring blah blah blah…”
August 15th, 2017 at 9:00 pm
Hey A.R., welcome back!
August 15th, 2017 at 11:53 pm
This is a good book which doesn’t deserve such bad covers.
It’s not really horror, even.
Weird how the wife’s face is almost photo-realistic, and the guy is so obviously a quick painting, very flat.
BC is correct, it looks much better upside down. Doesn’t quite make the feet fit, but closer.
August 16th, 2017 at 12:50 am
@GSSx-n—Supergirl never quite managed to figure out the feet thing while flying.
August 16th, 2017 at 1:31 am
Following BC and xnoob, I resorted to flipping my laptop upside-down. But I’m glad I did. The lack of contrast between the sky and graveyard makes it look rather like Supergirl is flying past an erupting volcano.
August 16th, 2017 at 1:35 pm
I guess the editor ran out of page space — otherwise he wold have just kept adding more production notes from the film’s press release:
“An Amicus Production shot in Pinewood Studios and released through United Universal Pictures by Roger Corman and relased on the following cinemas in the UK: Rialto, Cineworld, Filmhouse” […]
August 16th, 2017 at 6:49 pm
There’s something seriously off about that woman’s anatomy. Where’s her left hand gone? Why does she look like she’s flying/freefalling? Why do the upper and lower halves of her body appear to be disconnected and unrelated?
So, so many questions.
August 16th, 2017 at 10:50 pm
@Anna T.—No problem! Just flip it upside down and all, well not quite all, will make sense.
August 18th, 2017 at 3:24 am
…and here’s the song that should have been the title theme for the movie – never mind that the song is a decade or so newer than the movie….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QZnpNQ1z0g
August 18th, 2017 at 9:41 pm
We certainly can tell what the artist was interested in; the woman’s face and chest are lovingly, realistically detailed, and the rest of it’s a mess of gray.
August 20th, 2017 at 4:34 pm
Note the small copy “Complete and unabridged.”
It occurs a lot on 1950s releases — why? Is the implication that readers were often ripped off by “Reader’s Digest” shortened versions?