BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Mystery Science Theater 3000

 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
07:56 / 07.06.07
He said, according to writer and eventual star of the show Mike Nelson, that even the worst actors and writers don't deserve that kind of treatment. Then he declined to have dinner with Mike and the crew, citing important plans for the evening. Later that night they saw him eating alone at the same restaurant they were visiting. Dissed!

Anyway. I've always liked the show, and even though Vonnegut raises a good point I find that can't stop my enjoyment. But I can be a callous bastard sometimes, so I must ask barbelith. Mst3k: kosher or no? Is mocking someone's effort in filmmaking okay if it's really funny?

For anyone who hasn't seen the show, here's a sample. Mike and the bots are watching a short film titled "Are You Ready For Marriage?", an awareness film from the fifties.

Part One

Part Two
 
 
Mysterious Transfer Student
12:00 / 07.06.07
I'm a MSTie though not to the same extent as my SO, who watches the show almost every day and will defend it credibly and with gusto against any conceivable accusation. She's not here right now though so...

There's a passage in the MST3K guide to seasons 1-6 in which one of the creators, I think Kevin Murphy, describes his personal nightmare: that he would work, scrape and slave to see his personal cinematic vision realised, sacrificing the well-being and comfort of himself and his family year upon year, and after all that effort, discover that the precious artistic achievement he had thrown everything into making real would turn out to be a worthless pile of junk. Which was his and the MSTies' way of saying that at some level they sympathised with the heroically non-achieving filmmakers who produced the trash that they laid into so mercilessly; after all they themselves were in the position of trying to achieve something worthwhile with minimal resources. In addition it's worth remembering that the choice of movies they parodied was frequently dictated by whatever they could get rights to show, and if they'd been able to riff the shit out of a Tony Scott movie, they would; it's just that the process tended to favour the forgotten, the undistinguished and the cheesy by default, and so very occasionally the treatment tips over into sounding mean.

(Actually now I think of it the Vonnegut anecdote is in the same book so I'm guessing you, Tuna, are aware of the Murphy passage I mentioned. I just thought it was relevant to the topic.)
 
 
MattShepherd: I WEDDED KALI!
12:08 / 07.06.07
I have great sympathy for Vonnegut's argument, which is essentially that people shouldn't be mean. And MST3K is mean -- you can leaven that with "mean but with genuine affection for the things that it's poking fun at," but it's still mean.

On the other hand, anyone who produces anything for public consumption must be aware, from Orson Welles through Uwe Boll, that putting anything out there means you are opening it up for criticism and public comment, even harsh and mocking criticism and public comment.

So I'm of two minds, really: first, yes, being mean is mean; but second, the risk of somebody critiquing you harshly is one of the things you have to accept if you're putting stuff in the public eye.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:43 / 07.06.07
Well, there's only one thing to do, isn't there? Find out what Grant Morrison thinks about it? Only he can trump Kurt Vonnegut when it comes to giving us our opinion...

Otherwise, I am not particularly concerned with whether MST3K is mean, but it is inexplicable. I mean, yes, very cheap entertainment, aimed at BSc audience - it's basically Stargate SG:1. The main difference being that whereas one cannot colonise alien worlds with one's mates, one can watch cheesy old films and take the piss. Given that, I've never been entirely sure what value is added by having some people doing it for you from a script. Is it just a Dean Lerner-style "welcome to my lovely home. I just happen to be having a party with some of my friends" thing, for assuaging the late-night lonelies?
 
 
Eloi Tsabaoth
12:47 / 07.06.07
There's definitely a market for watching other people mocking things, Beavis and Butthead was popular in its time, although in that case the format was a cheap way of recycling music videos. Can Celebrity Piss-Take be far away? I suppose TV Burp is the closest...
 
 
Mysterious Transfer Student
13:05 / 07.06.07
BSc audience

The who now?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
13:39 / 07.06.07
True, but Beavis and Butthead was story-driven - the plot and the humour was based mainly in what went on in between the music videos. There was a reflexivity about it, as well - it was on MTV, the function of which was to show music videos, in which the protagonists watched music videos on MTV. Having said which, possibly that was a later development of the series, in response to viewer feedback. Possibly the movie treatments are interesting to compare - Beavis and Butthead had a plot-driven film with a narrative progression, at least theoretically. MST3K was a feature-length MST3K episode, in which This Island Earth was mocked in its entirety - there wasn't a lot of development potential.
 
 
grant
15:08 / 07.06.07
Having said which, possibly that was a later development of the series, in response to viewer feedback.

It was actually more-or-less a separate show, almost definitely inspired by the success of the MST3K TV show.

Glossing is easy.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:24 / 07.06.07
Apparently not as easy as it looks, at least not for the slower audience, as I have no idea what you mean. That the not-based-around-the-protagonists-watching-things Beavis and Butthead was a more-or-less separate show from... Beavis and Butthead? Based on the succes of the based-around-the-protagonists-watching-things MST3K?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:51 / 07.06.07
Ah-hah! Or do you mean that the watching-videos bit was put in due to the sucess of MST3K? Except that MST3K started 5 years before B&B, so that's awkward as well.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:59 / 07.06.07
Oh! Or did MST3K experience a surge in popularity around 1992-3, leading MTV to demand that Mike Judge interpolate scenes of B&B watching music videos and commenting on them late in the process? That could work, except I had always assumed that the "hook" of Beavis and Butthead - the thing that made it work as an MTV project - was the video watching. I suppose Daria didn't do that, but that was a later and more sophisticated period...
 
 
MattShepherd: I WEDDED KALI!
16:41 / 07.06.07
Not sure if I agree that "why, I could do that!" is a very good reason to dismiss the show as a whole.

When I watched MST3K, I did so with some confidence that the jokes would be at least different and faster-paced, if not necessarily always funnier, than ones I could come up with myself.

Sort of the reason that people watch soccer/football on television rather than rounding up a bunch of friends and kicking the ball around yourself, or watch Big Brother rather than just getting a bunch of people to move into a house with you and yell a lot. To some degree, this is professional mocking, and I expect a higher standard of mockery from MST3K than I do from me and a couple of buddies with some beer.

(Although I do not doubt for a second that Haus and his mates are funnier than me and mine by leaps and bounds, and when they get together to take the piss, it requires vast receptacles, barrels and buckets of awe-inspiring depth and girth, to hold the piss thus taken. If Haus and his mates' piss-taking abilities dwarf the piss-takery of the MST3K writers and cast, then the show will obviously be of no value to him, and I salute his brilliant comedy stylings.)

Anyway...

Putting aside relative piss-taking powers and whether or not you can "do" MST3K at home, I'm still interested in the question above, though -- Is mocking someone's effort in filmmaking okay if it's really funny? -- and how MST3K differs in substance from something like a film review show with clips (Siskel and Ebert) or a book review with substantial excerpts.

There are also things that fall closer to MST3K -- I'm an occasional browser of Television Without Pity, a Web site that reviews current TV shows with second-by-second commentary, usually scathing. Our own Film and Television forum contains blow-by-blow and frequently hilarious analyses of shows like Battlestar Galactica and Big Brother. The substance of MST3K's mockery is usually the failings of the movie in question -- bad story, bad acting, bad direction, bad props.

So what distinguishes a show like MST3K from Barbelith having a go at the latest episode of Heroes? From a particularly rollicking Roger Ebert review? Intent-to-mock rather than intent-to-criticize?
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
16:43 / 07.06.07
Well, there's only one thing to do, isn't there? Find out what Grant Morrison thinks about it? Only he can trump Kurt Vonnegut when it comes to giving us our opinion...

Hey, I'm allowed to be affected by my literary hero's values, aren't I?

I mean, yes, very cheap entertainment, aimed at BSc audience - it's basically Stargate SG:1

The what audience? And how is it like Stargate SG:1?

The main difference being that whereas one cannot colonise alien worlds with one's mates,...

Probably not the main difference, I'm thinking...

one can watch cheesy old films and take the piss. Given that, I've never been entirely sure what value is added by having some people doing it for you from a script.

It's funnier?

Is it just a Dean Lerner-style "welcome to my lovely home. I just happen to be having a party with some of my friends" thing, for assuaging the late-night lonelies?

I can see how you'd think that, but the airing times don't support any theory about assuaging the "late-night lonelies" (which sound creepy). It does have a cult following, which in itself makes me think it's fulfilling some strange need in a select group of people...

I dunno. The creators and writers were (are) funny guys. It's a funny show. I'm having a hard time imagining it as "inexplicable".
 
 
Mysterious Transfer Student
17:40 / 07.06.07
Leaving aside for the moment the as yet undefined "BSc audience" - here I think Haus might be alluding to a conception of MST3K as snickering, nerdy undergraduate humour, of the kind that is endlessly amusing to groups of pals who'll happily parrot their favourite lines at the drop of a hat, and is desperately tiresome to outsiders - the case could be made that the better the cinematic material the writers had to riff on, the lower was the standard of comedy they produced.

Case in point: the MST3K movie and its treatment of This Island Earth, which is one of the best pulp sci-fi movies of its era, and achieves a level of drama and seriousness that its superficially hammy acting and camp design don't undermine, is probably one of their less successful ventures. Films like Outlaw of Gor, Jungle Goddess or The Incredibly Strange Creatures who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-up Zombies, on the other hand, are ripe for dissection at the hands of skilled comedy writers because they are so overheated, crummy, deranged and offensive in so many ways.

I don't know. Convincing others of the reasons why something is and must be funny is probably one of the least productive things you can try to do, but it can occasionally be interesting.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
18:33 / 07.06.07
...the case could be made that the better the cinematic material the writers had to riff on, the lower was the standard of comedy they produced.

Case in point: the MST3K movie and its treatment of This Island Earth, which is one of the best pulp sci-fi movies of its era, and achieves a level of drama and seriousness that its superficially hammy acting and camp design don't undermine, is probably one of their less successful ventures.


Mmmm, I'm not so sure I agree with that. This Island Earth is indeed one of the hallmark pulp sci-fi movies of its era, and what our mysterious transfer student says about it is entirely true. However, that doesn't affect the comedic value of the "riffing", as the cast calls it--after the show was cancelled (it aired nine or ten seasons and ran reruns for four more), Mike Nelson and Kevin Murphy went on to do "Riff Tracks", or "Riff Trax", which are audio tracks for popular films. The Star Wars prequels, Daredevil, or Battlefield Earth for instance. While these aren't good movies or examples of a type of period film--some might even call them shitty movies--I don't think the production value or level of writing affects the inherent comedy value.

It should also be noted that the Riff Trax aren't nearly as good without at least Mike Nelson and Kevin Murphy. There are some where only one of them does all the riffing, and for some reason it gets old quick. Which, to me, signals that the show is more than just funny riffs--the characters Crow, Tom Servo and Mike have their own personalities that work very well in tandem. They do have host segments, after all, and even though these are only a fraction of the running time of the show I don't think it's fair to claim that there is no progressive story going on or that that story has no influence on the quality of the show in general.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
18:44 / 07.06.07
Just watched some samples of the Riff Trax on Youtube. I hadn't realized they had done so many...Animal House, the Matrix trilogy, Reign of Fire, X-men, Top Gun, Terminator 3, the Grudge...

Sample of Daredevil riff track. Is it me or is something missing? This kinda supports my theory that much of the charm of the show lies in the characters.
 
 
grant
20:59 / 07.06.07
id MST3K experience a surge in popularity around 1992-3, leading MTV to demand that Mike Judge interpolate scenes of B&B watching music videos and commenting on them late in the process? That could work, except I had always assumed that the "hook" of Beavis and Butthead - the thing that made it work as an MTV project - was the video watching.

Yeah, that's the one.

Beavis & Butthead actually started on Liquid Television as a five-minute-or-so short called, I think, "Beavis & Butthead in 'Frog Baseball'" or similar. Simple plot: the two protagonists hit things with baseball bats while displaying disheartening levels of ignorance and crudity. The franchise developed from that into a few more narrative sketch-type things, grew steadily in popularity until it became its own show, and then the two heroes started watching the videos and offering commentary.

I hang my head in shame for bearing this knowledge.

I believe this was about the same time "Pop-up Video" became popular on VH-1, although that may have followed by a year or so.

Anyway, from a production standpoint, glossing is easy - you already own whatever prior footage your characters are commenting on, you don't have to change sets or locations or anything visual at all, really. All you need is a writer (or writers) to deliver a steady stream of commentary, and a microphone to capture the actors delivering the lines. (With "Pop-up Video," you didn't even need that - did that show cross the Atlantic? It was all videos from the 80s with bits of trivia and occasional sarky commentary that would appear in little bubbles as the video progressed.)
 
 
grant
21:07 / 07.06.07
Sarah Vowell on "Pop-Up Video".

She loved the show because she hates videos. Is that mean?
 
 
_pin
21:16 / 07.06.07
Yes, it did, and it made little noises whenever a box would come up, which I assume is because the song is shit and you are meant to not listen to it but instead dedicate your whole attention to the programme.

Basically, glossing music videos for any period of time is shown here to be stupid, because it's really really hard to care so much that you keep looking, and then it's really hard to not go mad from the noises.

I also agree with the idea that this work is all public stuff, and I'm also not really sure how much love went in to a lot of the product being slated. It's not, like, a diary. It's a thing that was made to be paid for by its audience, who are inevitably going to actually see it, once they've paid. And then they're going to have opinions about it, and talk about them. If they didn't want that to happen, they shouldn't have let people see their precious precious imaginings.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:26 / 07.06.07
Ah, I see the confusion - I took "gloss" to mean a marginal gloss, in this case your explanation, rather than the process whereby new material is interpolated into Beavis and Butthead.

I think my confusion has largely been resolved - many of the people who are keen on MST3K are getting from it something that I get from other sources.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
23:01 / 07.06.07
Which sources would these be? C'mon man hook a brother up.
 
 
This Sunday
23:34 / 07.06.07
I may be blanking out the more vicious material from the show, given, but I don't remember a lot of vicious material to MST3K. Most of the jokes, whether sex jokes, pacing or plotting issues, or an oddity in costuming, are not in any way not applicable to quality films. Many of the best films of Earth have a moment some people just find hilarious, or a context for a scene that they can't shake on a re-watch even if the original make-funny stimulus isn't present. That, to me, was the show.

It helped that there were some interestingly simple character dynamics going on, on the satellite or the villain's at the time of episode, but aside from the actors, nobody really got trashed, and even the actors weren't usually... 'Hey, it's Tom Petty!' from that bear-headed Russo-flavored movie is more at the expense of Tom Petty than the actor in on screen.

From memory, the video commentary in Beavis & Butthead was often less contextual. Aside from 'He's Lemmy, he can walk into any video he wants to' I can't remember anything that couldn't have another video swapped for the one they're supposed to be watching with little damage to the interpretation/riffing.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
06:13 / 08.06.07
The riff tracks on Daredevil and The Phantom Menace were actually worse than Daredevil and The Phantom Menace ~ I kind of wished I was just watching those two very bad films without interruption.
 
 
electric monk
14:40 / 08.06.07
I think Vonnegut's wrong on this one. Possibly he doesn't get the concept of the thing, doesn't understand the roots from which MST3K sprung or the brilliant extrapolation of those roots that the folks at Best Brains, Inc. managed to build.

(A little MST3K History for interested parties.)

MST3K lies on the cutting edge of a subset of science-fiction fandom. Namely, the Creature Feature. Small TV stations in the U.S. (and I say "U.S." because I don't know if this "sub-genre" was ever a part of the sci-fi set 'cross the pond) have, for many years, run a late night or Saturday afternoon "monster movie", complete with host and super-cheap crypt set. The idea is simple really: B-movies are a cheap way to fill two hours in the programming block. As far as I can tell, the host is a local flavoring. A sometimes goofy/sometimes serious set piece to soften the transition from 'The Beast of Yucca Flats' to dog food commercials. Some hosts become personalities in their own right and make guest appearances at retail center grand openings and the like, or go on to better things. The most immediate example I can think of (and the one I grew up with) is The Son of Svengoolie. Svengoolie was irreverent to a fault. Nothing about the movies being shown was taken seriously. Jokes at the movie's expense during the host segments were standard. And Svengoolie wasn't just B-movies, as I recall. That show introduced me to the Hammer horror films and the Godzilla movies and, oh, all sorts of wonderful films. Films I still have time for to this day.

The brilliance of MST3K was taking this format to the next level, bringing the hosts into the theater, playing with the irreverence of good friends in front of the TV, bringing a new level of intelligence (or smartassery if you prefer) to the proceedings, and using the format as a story point to justify the madness of it all. Importantly, I think, the MST3K crew never tried to put themselves on a level above the films they watched. Their production values were just as low, the acting just as uneven, the effects just as laughable. Even the 'bots, Crow and Servo, were kinda pathetic. Tom Servo is a gumball machine with arms and a beak. Crow's proboscis is a plastic bowling pin. But it worked. It worked, I think, because there was a certain self-awareness to the whole proceeding. A subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) self-depreciation suffused the show. An acceptance, and a reveling-in, their B-movie status. I remember clearly an MST sketch where Crow, having been shaken a little too much, began to fall apart. It seemed to me that there was a moment of hesitation on the part of the crew...and then they just start screaming in alarm. It didn't seem planned. Just one of those moments when the man behind the camera said, "Keep rolling!" In the voice of Ed Wood, one would hope.

Now, as to whether the writers and actors "deserve" this kind of treatment...I don't think it's a question of do they "deserve" it so much as how they feel about it. I don't know if Roger Corman ever objected to the treatment his AIP movies got. I would be surprised if he did, frankly. Movies created on a 10-day schedule can't be that precious. Sidney Franks came in for a lot of stick on MST and yanked the rights to his movies. So that's one that was upset and probably felt he didn't deserve it. I know the people who held the rights for these movies must have been happy, because some of them upped the price for syndication rights after their movies appeared on MST3K. That's got nothing to do with the actors or writers, obvs. Still, MST was an outlet for these movies, and I doubt I would appreciate the oeuvre of Tor Johnson without MST. True, I don't enjoy it in the way Kurt Vonnegut might have me enjoy it, but then that's really none of his business. Callous maybe, but there it is. There's a great quote in Stephen King's 'Danse Macabre' about the appeal of bad movies that I'll have to dig out later. He says, essentially, that our urge to laugh at bad movies is rooted in being a fan of movies. We like the good, and we're willing to dig thru the shit to find the occassional diamond. And this is true for me. Seeing, for example, 'Warrior of the Lost World' and 'Parts: the Clonus Horror' on MST, I was able to laugh along with the barbs and jabs, but also enjoy the movies in their own right knowing that if I'd seen them as a teenager I would have loved them. So maybe there's a bit of us that's laughing at ourselves when we're laughing at a horrible B-movie. Maybe.

Further, bad sci-fi wasn't MST's only target. Marketing and info films were also run to fill space in the show. Short motivational films for milk delivery men. Horribly simplistic educational films like the one Tuna Ghost links to above. "Uncle Jim's Dairy Farm" (fucking classic BTW). Are these sacred as well? Should we spare the feelings of these writers and actors? I'd love to hear the case being made, but I doubt I'd agree with it. That's me, tho.

Which, to me, signals that the show is more than just funny riffs--the characters Crow, Tom Servo and Mike have their own personalities that work very well in tandem. They do have host segments, after all, and even though these are only a fraction of the running time of the show I don't think it's fair to claim that there is no progressive story going on or that that story has no influence on the quality of the show in general.

Absolutely. And I think that's why some of us have a hard time when it's just one of the MST knuckleheads making fun of a movie. One person making fun of a movie just seems bitter. A group making fun of a movie is easier to take, as it's easy for the viewer feels a part of that group. The singular viewpoint was what made it hard for me to read 'Mike Nelson's Movie Megacheese', which is basically a one man MST show in novel form. It seemse to me that Mike realized this as well, as the book is packed with self-depreciating comments. Perhaps that's just his schtick, tho. At any rate, that bitter has to be leavened somehow, even if it's only by spreading it evenly around.

I may be blanking out the more vicious material from the show, given, but I don't remember a lot of vicious material to MST3K.

I do feel kind of sorry for the lead actor in 'High School Big Shot'. It's one of my favorite episodes, but the boys put a lot of thought and effort into denigrating the guy's looks. "Ugh, I hate when his face lights up."
 
 
grant
01:32 / 09.06.07
The most immediate example I can think of (and the one I grew up with) is The Son of Svengoolie.

Nothing compared to Dr. Paul Bearer (who I think was the longest-lasting ones in the biz, and who also had the mayor of Tampa officially proclaim a "Dr. Paul Bearer Day").

There are more listed here.

There are also a couple Cramps songs based around the phenomenon - "Wighat" was based on (or possibly even written by) a creature feature host in Ohio.
 
 
Seth
12:12 / 09.06.07
YO! That's a really great post, high school big shot.

I really enjoyed the way the series undermined the tacit implication that movies are the sole domain of a select few to create and distribute and that the audience is just there to appreciate them rather than interact with them in a more hands on manner. It's understandable that some films were cost prohibitive to include, but as I understand there's a lot of homemade audio commentary tracks for DVDs, plus the phenomenon of the Star Wars re-edits which also work in a similar manner. Having seen the originals and the re-edits they're a great insight into what fans thought was poor about the originals and are better films for it.
 
 
electric monk
15:44 / 14.06.07
"Dr. Paul Bearer". That's inspired cheese. And thanks for that listing link, dude! I'm lovin'.


Here's that Stephen King quote if anyone's still interested. It comes from Chapter 7 of 'Danse Macabre', "Horror Movies as Junk Food" by name.

I am no apologist for bad filmmaking, but once you've spent twenty years or so going to horror movies, searching for diamonds (or diamond-chips) in the dreck of the B-pics, you realize that if you don't keep your sense of humor, you're done for. You also begin to seek the patterns and appreciate them when you find them.

There's something else that needs saying here, too, and I might as well give it to you straight from the shoulder: once you've seen enough horror films, you begin to get a taste for really shitty movies. Films that are just bad...can be dismissed impatiently with never a backward glance. But real fans of the genre look back on a film like The Brain from Planet Arous ("It Came from Another World WITH AN INSATIABLE LUST FOR EARTH WOMEN!") with something like real love. It is the love one spares for an idiot child, true, but love is love, right? Right.


I'm not sure that the bad-movie compulsion is as universal as Mr. King would have us believe, but it is a good description of my movie-watching habits, and a partial explanation of why I enjoyed MST3K and currently enjoy the weekly SciFi Channel Original Movie offerings so much (Dirk Benedict Blows Up the Moon! Stephen Baldwin Puts It Back Together!).
 
 
grant
21:14 / 14.06.07
"Learn to watch the worst films. They are sometimes sublime." - Ado Kyrou.
 
 
grant
18:40 / 15.06.07
Which is just my way of saying, "Me, too."

I think there's that line of ridicule where you can make fun of the material as long as you realize that you're the one sitting there watching it so obviously on some level it's a worthwhile and beautiful thing.


And the best thing about Dr. Paul Bearer was the way he pronounced his last name. Bay-RURRRRR.
 
  
Add Your Reply