Thanks for doing the episode, guys!

It is with great pleasure that I can announce that the Grindbin Podcast has taken my suggestion and done an episode on one of my favorite utterly-bonkers Hong Kong sci-fi sexploitation movies, Robotrix.

For those among you who don’t know it already, the Grindpod (Mike Wood and Chris Mann and various guests) has been going strong for about two years now, doing tongue-in-cheek extended reviews of B-list to bottom-of-the-bin cinema. It’s a very fun podcast and definitely on my weekly listening rotation. They graciously accepted my recommendation of Robotrix and managed to riff on it for two hours (longer than the movie’s running time, I think). A few Grand Guignol scenes aside (omitted from the version available streaming on Amazon for those who want to omit them), they really seem to have liked this one, which makes me very happy. They even threw in a little plug for this humble blog at the beginning. Thanks, guys! (And if anyone has followed their recommendation hither, welcome!)

The Grindbin has a website here (Robotrix appears not to be up yet but I suspect will be soon), find them with your podcatching software of choice (just search for “Grindbin”), and support them on Patreon (as I do). Patreon support unlocks additional special content and if you support them at a high-enough level, you can pick a movie for them to review.

Now that I’ve got them enthused about Hong Kong cinema, perhaps I can seduce them into doing Sex and Zen. More Yiptease if you’re looking for it, gentlemen…

Pre-code comics carried on the old pulp tradition

This is the cover from a series called Black Cat Mystery Comics, Issue #32, published December 1951. I hesitate to imagine what that poor girl is about to be plunged into. (A hot spring? Hell itself?) Details on the issue are thin, but there’s an entry for in in the Grand Comics Database here. This image is a reblog from a 16 November 2013 post at Infernal Wonders, itself originally picked up from the now sadly defunct tumblr Great Grotto.

A comment on commenting

It’s an unfortunate truth, but a truth nonetheless, that unmoderated discussions on the Internet tend to spiral into the sewer. I allow comments here at Erotic Mad Science and for the most part I have been pretty well pleased over the years at the civil tone people here have taken both with me and with one another. The comments section on a recent post, however, generated to my mind what is a bit of a minor tsuris. Not a big tragedy by any means but certainly an occasion for a gentle reminder and a brief statement of some commonsense principles for commenting on this blog, or any of my other blogs, for that matter. I’m not calling out anyone in particular, but I do think that now is a good time to say what follows.

I don’t object to being criticized, even if I think the criticism is harsh or possibly even unfair, and I don’t mind others joining into a critical discussion. Encountering the opinions of others, even if they are unfavorable, is part of the price of being an author and an editor. I do, however, hold it as cardinal principle that commenters should criticize ideas and not people. You don’t like what’s going on with the content here? By all means feel free to say so, as long as you do so in a coherent and civil fashion. (As a necessary aside, though, if you consistently don’t like what you see here you might want to ask yourself whether being here is a good use of your time. It’s a big Internet. Heck, it’s a big world.) But discussions about what people are like? Well, the thing is that I don’t know very many of you personally, and I strongly suspect that many of you don’t know each other personally. So as I see it no one has any business commenting or even really speculating as to the moral character or private lives of myself, my contributors, or other commenters. That way lies pointless and bitter conflict. As with so many other things, good old Thomas Hobbes put it well:

And because all signes of hatred, or contempt, provoke to fight; insomuch as most men choose rather to hazard their life, than not to be revenged; we may…for a Law of Nature set down this Precept, “That no man by deed, word, countenance, or gesture, declare Hatred, or Contempt of another.” The breach of which Law, is commonly called Contumely.

If you think someone (especially me) has bad ideas, say so. But if call someone here a bad person, I will take measures which might include putting you into moderation or, in the case of significant or repeated misdeeds, I’ll ban you entirely. The same applies to anything that I think is just an insult or name calling.

Now of course doing this moderation will involve some judgment calls on my part. Sometimes drawing the distinction between the mere expression of a controversial thesis and outright trolling, or that between the ideas and the person, or that between a misfired witticism and an insult, will depend on my making a judgment of the good faith of the commenter, and I’m as fallible at that as the next guy. I call them as I see them. Sometimes I’ll get it wrong.

Now if I make a mistake I’m sorry. But I will not argue the point with you if I do. If I had an unlimited amount of time to devote to comment moderation I might do things differently. But I don’t have unlimited time. This site is not my job. I don’t earn money — not a dime — from it, which is fine with me because as a purely self-financing content creator I have greater independence than I would if I did have to earn money from my writing. I have family and professional obligations in my meatspace life, and they come first. This site fits into time that I have left over from these, and any time I spend arguing with a commenter means time I don’t have for writing or editing (and is also usually a source of weariness and cynicism besides). In major league baseball, if you argue balls and strikes with an umpire you will be ejected. I take it the rationale for the rule isn’t because umpires are infallible, but to prevent games from devolving into litigious chaos. A similar rationale applies here.

Be decent to one another. I know you can.

Very Large Conehead Zombie Surprise

You wouldn’t know it from this photo, but the role of the enormous bloody deformed conehead zombie creature is to save the nude lady from an evil mad scientist:

Eddie Carmel as a cone head zombie monster

Two different blog posts assure us that this is a publicity photo (no such scene actually appearing in the movie) for the 1962 mad science horror flick The Brain That Would Not Die:

The Brain That Would Not Die movie poster

The movie itself is in the public domain and is viewable at the Internet Archive. More information about the film, including a detailed synopsis of the plot, is available at Wikipedia.

The monster-conehead-zombie was played by Eddie Carmel, a 7-foot, 3-inch tall giant known as “The Jewish Giant”. One website about him offers a tiny and watermarked version of this photo that has been cropped less than any of the others available on the web. (Although the clothing and bodies below the “Giants And Girls” legend appear crudely Photoshopped-in, the model’s belly button looks possibly original, indicating that there’s just a smidge more of the original photo in this version.)

photoshopped promotional photo eddie carmel

This image is a reblog from a 10 November 2013 post at Infernal Wonders. Its original source is the long gone and greatly missed tumblr The World Of Doctor Orloff! (A very incomplete copy may be viewed in the Internet Archive.)

It’s beginning to look a lot like fishmen…

Probably actress Barbara Bach (b. 1947) posing with a fishman played by I-know-not-whom in a publicity still for the 1979 Italian action-adventure-horror film L’isola degli uomini pesce (Island of the Fishmen).

As it does so often, the IMDB entry (which gives the movie the title Screamers) does not disappoint in its luridness.

The main image on this post is a reblog from a 16 November 2013 post at Infernal Wonders. The first appearance the image made appears to have been at a tumblr called Cocks and Cowboys.