Monday, July 2, 2012

The Tao of Ric: True Lies & A Fistful of Meyerisms Part 8--A New Beginning


"Each title within was chosen because something about it illuminated some dark corner of the genre..."--I wouldn't know since you tear apart just about everything you talk about and make shit up about everything else.

Well, here we are with yet another chapter in the neverending saga of that lovable ape, Ric Meyers and his perplexing career as an author of books that thrive on misinformation and imaginary plot lines. This time we rip into his latest faux filled tome, FOR ONE WEEK ONLY: THE WORLD OF EXPLOITATION FILMS; re-written from his earlier bullshit volume that oozed onto bookshelves in 1983.

I suppose so long as he continues to waste paper, not bother with actually watching the damn movies he writes about, and employ what has to be the worst proofreaders on the planet, there will be plenty to find fault with.

"You think I want to be reamed like this?"--The Urban Dictionary describes 'reamed' as such: to annihilate the ass-hole of your sexual partner while performing anal sex. I think that's something you should be discussing with your partner, not me.

"I do NOT think I'm always right! I know I'm not, as you've just shown, and, believe it or not, I thank you for it! Truly, I am very happy to finally "meet" you because mostly people stab me in the back. I WANT to get better, and always have, and thank the movie gods for showing me someone who'll stab me in the front!"--This is great because later on you say MAYBE you were wrong. Too rich. Considering folks have been pissed and irritated at your carelessly lackluster approach, you've had 30 years to get better. You claim you re-wrote this book, yet it's a loaded baked potato of mixed, and made up information for movies you trash and obviously have never even seen!!!

Whereas the previous seven installments dealt solely with Chinese kung fu cinema (and a guest appearance by Japanese Chambara and Ninjer movies in part 6), this one is going to be devoted to American exploitation movies, since, judging by this books Introduction, Meyers fancies himself a Drive In god, too.

And like the previous installments, the 'Ric Notes' that are the Meyerisms make a triumphant return as well. In addition, this piece is peppered with a healthy sampling of actual verbatim remarks Ric made to me at the Cool Ass Cinema Facebook page during a debate worthy of a Sean Hannity shootout. Anyways, those remarks were so funny as well as contradictory, that they begged inclusion here. Those Ric Remarks are highlighted in yellow. You'll also find a bunch of special guest stars; some of which you've already seen--everyone from Baron Munchausen, to Benny Hill, to Sir Richard Attenborough--participating in this last Ric Roast... or at least till he writes another Faux Filled tome.

"Okay, found it, read it. Thanks (?). Not surprisingly, it was helpful reading, and I took the corrections to heart, although it was sometimes tough to separate them from the differences of opinion and, especially, a lot of character assassination and attacks on my motives (or at least it sure seemed like a lot)."--Ric on reading, as he later called them, the Seven Tao of Assholes articles; an amazing feat he seemed to have accomplished in a mind-boggling matter of minutes. He also kept going on and on about anonymous character assassinations(??). Apparently, he read these with as much attention as he gives his own books.

"To avoid fainting, keep repeating: it's only a's only a's only a book."
--I was telling myself this very thing after about the 8th Aleve.

Originally published in 1983, this newly "revised" version... excuse me, I got choked up there momentarily at the irony of that first statement. I assume this re-fucked up edition of For One Week Only is supposed to be an improvement over the older fucked up one. Meyers did say he rewrote the damn thing. Well, I haven't seen the original outside of viewing a few pages on amazon, but not only is this 217 page book generously populated with Meyers' patented brand of in-faux, but the damn back cover of this thing is a big fat lie, too.

"Hey Cool Ass, absolutely! I would've LOVED to hire you, and wish I had known about you before the "remastered" (or, as you've pointed out, the "re-NOT-mastered") version of FOWO."--Well, better late than never, I always say.

Before we get to the back cover, the mutha-fuckin' front cover has an absolutely rib-ticklin' blurb from People Magazine that looks like a bad English subtitle from a Hong Kong movie. Bear witness to, "This is must reading." In keeping with the HK vibe, this should actually read, "This is mustn't reading." When the hell did People Magazine begin heralding books on trashy movies, anyways?!

On the back there's an unusually glowing review from Film Quarterly who either haven't seen many of the movies, or they wrote their review at gunpoint. The best part of their acknowledgment is the last sentence, "...virtually all the illustrations are unavailable elsewhere in book form."

It should be noted that said illustrations are unavailable here, too. There are no illustrations in this mess save for three pages that feature a collage of B/W poster images at the start of each of the three sections.

Just below that, you'll find this fallacy filled excerpt, "Now, for the second time ever, FOR ONE WEEK ONLY reveals the incredible truth behind the most manic movies ever made. Filled with interviews and rare illustrations..." okay that's enough. Where are the interviews? Where are these rare illustrations?? Where is the truth revealed??? You'd think that if said interviews and illustrations weren't ported over from the first edition (why shouldn't they be?), this careless oversight should have been corrected.

"...If there's one thing I've learned in that time is that the public, including me, goes for quality, and if you supply it, they will buy it."--yes, but in your case, you supplied slop. And there shouldn't be a charge for shit.

Looking at the Table of Contents of the first edition, it's the exact same as the new one!

Yet again, Meyers shows himself to be only interested in making a quick buck. He doesn't seem to care about his subjects as much as he wants you to think he does.

The way this book is laid out looks like it was typed up in Microsoft Works and printed out from there. The titles, and or other credits overlap from one page to the next as opposed to starting a new topic on a new page. Everything just runs off together.

"The only difference between us is that I've had a 30 year head start..."--Yes, in Malarkiology, a subject you have a BS degree in; and I don't mean Bachelor of Science.

Also, Meyers has the gall to condemn the carny style cinema hucksters of yesteryear for promoting their filmic wares in such a way that he's essentially branding them outright liars. Pot meet Godfather Kettle.

For instance, since the US poster artwork for Fulci's SEVEN DOORS OF DEATH (alias THE BEYOND) featured bogus statements from Kim Henkel and Tobe Hooper regarding that film, then Meyers gets a pass for his 30 year "career" doing far more damage than any motion picture barker could hope for. The difference here is that movies, especially those like this, are entertainment. Meyers is supposed to be writing a critical reference work. Yet he treats the material, and all others he has laid his lying pen onto paper as if he's writing factual information.

"You guys have no idea how much I wish you had gone after me before my first audio commentary for Tai Seng. I would've BEGGED you to join or usurp me, and if I ever am asked to do another, I will direct the distributor to you..."--Last one in the Pity Pool is a lousy liar!

Whatever tactics distributors used to sell their acquisitions, this sort of tradition still carries on today, regardless of what Meyers says in his book. Apparently he hasn't seen any of Roger Corman's post New World movies. The movie showmanship of yesteryear may be dead, but the methods are still alive in less exploitative ways.

Trailers these days often put all the best parts in them with the actual movies sometimes being less than the sum of the previews parts.

Meyers spends a lot of pages condemning 70s trash cinema for allegedly duping their audience. The reality is who in the hell makes/imports/distributes a stinker and promotes it as if the last thing they want is a paying audience? This is the nature of advertising and it isn't limited to the motion picture industry. Not to mention his own duping of the audience by adding details to movies that were never there in the first place.

"I'm not being facetious or sarcastic, C.A.C. Let's e-talk anytime. If you could set me straight, I'd appreciate it (and I did months of research for the original For One Week Only, and years of research on the martial art movie books, but always thirst for more)."--The first SEVEN Tao of Assholes articles plus this one show what those MONTHS and YEARS of research on exploitation and martial arts movies have to show for it. Furthermore, the way I heard it was, you merely took a stack of 'Gore Gazette' fanzines and made your book from those... and it shows.

The fuck ups aren't just relegated to the book, either. Some websites claim there's 270 pages of pablum on display when it's actually 217 not counting a couple of blank pages. Can you imagine 53 more pages of this shit?

Interestingly, at the bottom of the back cover, we get the 'About the Author' where Err Meyers lists his accomplishments including one that states he was a consultant on Jeff Lieberman's JUST BEFORE DAWN (1980). What's most intriguing about this mention is that Meyers includes that movie in this book, yet NOWHERE does he mention his involvement; which is stunning in light of the fact that Meyers must have the most bruised back on the planet from all the constant patting he gives himself.

"...most talk behind my back, and I have long stopped checking the forums because so much was so mean-spirited. And I'm not attacking your motives, just saying, on the basis of the vehemence you've shown me, you might have projected onto me some hatred that I didn't feel toward Run Run."--I never said you hated Shaw nor showing you vehemence; but you obviously bore animosity towards him via the numerous condescending remarks, most of which are posted verbatim throughout the previous 7 Tao of Assholes articles.

"I hope to continue to share my love of these films with others because I love to do it (I have to do other things to finance my money-losing support of the genre)."--What you're really saying here is "I hope to continue sharing lies and stories I dreamt up while engaging in self-flagellation." If you're losing money "supporting" the genre, than that means the public is "ignoring your lessons", and you've shown you don't like to be ignored.

Making our way inside we find that there's an Introduction and a Preface. You might notice the lack of a contributor writing these, but instead Meyers does both. The Introduction is of special interest in that it's one of the single most narcissistic ramblings I have ever read in my entire life. Below is a portion of the Intro verbatim...

"The way I heard it was: in 1983, a small textbook publisher decided to get into the mainstream market in a big way. Their tickets to ride? A lavish, full-color book on the making of the Oscar-winning movie GANDHI... and an energetic homage to the grindhouse movies of the sixties and seventies.

IN SEARCH OF GANDHI was written by the film's director, Sir Richard Attenborough, and was as meticulously produced as the film itself. FOR ONE WEEK ONLY: THE WORLD OF EXPLOITATION FILMS' manuscript was slapped between two dull, unimaginative covers.

IN SEARCH OF GANDHI was lovingly presented to bookstores on bended knee. Only thirty-three hundred copies of FOR ONE WEEK ONLY were printed.

FOR ONE WEEK ONLY sold out--accompanied by rave reviews from magazines as diverse as People, Film Comment, and even The National Enquirer. IN SEARCH OF GANDHI tanked, taking the textbook publisher with it.

In the intervening decades, the information and illustrations in FOR ONE WEEK ONLY lay dormant, unsullied by any other publisher...until now."

WOW. JUST WOW..... It's like Ric slapped Sir Richard Attenborough with his own Gandhi book! That Ric's book is filled with falsehoods the first and second time around is an even bigger insult! The National Enquirer reviewed this thing?! Why not the tabloid you worked for, The Weekly World News?! I can see the review now, "Book comes to life... eats author."

From there, Meyers flirts with the self-ingratiating notion that his book helped spark major studio interest in exploitation movies back in '83. Like they'd never done such a thing. Ummm, THE HUNTING PARTY (1971)? DIRTY MARY, CRAZY LARRY (1974)? MANDINGO (1975)?

He also goes on to say that today, the genre he had once praised (?) was now dead(?). Reading through this book, you'd be hard pressed to find Meyers doing much praising of anything except himself. Even the movies he makes up plots for he has derogatory things to say!

"Okay, C.A. I know don't make up stuff, don't mean to spread lies, fabricate fantasy, or masquerade as a fan."--Wow, you should be a politician. You're right, you DO NOT FABRICATE FANTASY. If you did, you'd be telling the fucking truth. You do make shit up. The vast universe of Meyerisms in the previous Tao of Assholes articles and including this one attest to it. Verbatim. In your own words.

Since Err Meyers likens himself an historian, he kicks off his first chapter 'SEX, DRUGS, AND ROCK N ROLL' with a fucking history lesson. Yes, just like the twisted, mangled "facts" he blessed us with in his equally falsified kung fu-ninjer historical accounts of his "groundbreaking" martial arts books, we get the history of the American motion picture industry in FOR ONE WEEK ONLY, but For 2 1/2 Pages Only. From there, it's a confusing cavalcade of movies Ric has obviously not seen, or not bothered to revisit before rewriting this travesty. For what little it's worth, the other two chapters are 'Violence' and 'Horror' with both chapters containing movies that make the names of the chapters pointless.


1. In FRIDAY THE 13TH, Kevin Bacon does not get an axe to his dick, Ric. How do you fuck up FRIDAY THE 13TH?! Do you not own a copy?! You couldn't rent one?!

2. There are no killer bugs in THE LIVING DEAD AT THE MANCHESTER MORGUE aka BREAKFAST AT THE MANCHESTER MORGUE aka LET SLEEPING CORPSES LIE aka DON'T OPEN THE WINDOW (1974). There's flesh-eating zombies, but no killer bugs. There's a bug killing device that inadvertently brings the dead back to life, but again, no fucking killer bugs. Anywhere. In this movie.

3. " calls attention to the lies we all live. Lies of civility, hypocrisy, insincerity, insecurity, pretense, duplicity, greed, fear, desire, and stupidity."--WOW. This could be your autobiography, Ric!

4. As much as you'd like it to be so, GATOR BAIT AND THE SINGLE GIRLS doesn't exist. GATOR BAIT (1974) and THE SINGLE GIRLS (1974) do, however.

5. James Westmoreland is definitely in DON'T ANSWER THE PHONE! (1980), Ric, but he's not the killer. He's the cop. Nicholas Worth (you know, the bald guy who gets turned into a mutant midget in 1982's SWAMP THING?) plays the crazed ex-'Nam vet who is the killer.

6. One of the crazed killers in MOTHER'S DAY (1980) is not decapitated, Ric.

7. When you write a book, and you're talking about the movie highlighted on the fucking page, it's a good idea to actually write about THAT PARTICULAR MOVIE instead of talking about six other flicks in its place.

8. "I've never hated Run Run Shaw. I felt it an honor to talk to him, and an even greater honor to meet him when he was 93."--The story you've told on numerous commentary tracks contradicts this. If you met him when he was 93, that would be in 2000. Your commentaries from '01 onward state you only spoke to him on the phone where the bulk of his dialog to you was the word 'NO'. Even on your own damn website you state you only spoke to him! From there, you repeatedly went on printed and audible tirades against Shaw because he refused to meet you and accept your book. Your animosity towards him is clearly in evidence.

9. Your section on PARASITE (1982)--like so much of this authored fiasco--is all over the place. You somehow connect Albert Band as being the director of GRAVE OF THE VAMPIRE (1974); a film directed by John Hayes which you discuss on page 159 where you have the director right. But in the index, you only have GRAVE mentioned as being found on page 177, which is actually the PARASITE section where you go off on all sorts of tangents and credit GRAVE to Albert Band!!!

10. It's Ferd Sebastian, Ric. Not Fred. FERD.

11. POSTFACE page 193: "The exploitation film is dead..."

POSTFACE page 194: "...the exploitation film will never die."

12. In DRACULA VS. FRANKENSTEIN (1971), Dracula does not kill the Frankenstein Monster by shooting laser bolts out of his fingers, Ric. He rips his arms and head off. Now look what you did; you made me give away the ending! Actually, you've mangled the ending on the film and the alternate ending. In that unused finale, Frankie takes a bad optical effect square in the chest, but Drac doesn't dissolve in the sun. He gets impaled on a pole.

13. "In the time it took to rewrite and republish this book..."--Excuse me while I go laugh my ass off.

14. In the section about MOTHER'S DAY (1980), Meyers spends an entire page talking about FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 2 (1981) and MY BLOODY VALENTINE (1981). Regarding MBV, Meyers either hasn't seen it, or didn't pay a whole helluva lot of attention to the movie.

15. On more than a few occasions, Meyers caterwauls about how slasher filmmakers supposedly whine about losing a minute or so of footage of gore in a 90 minute movie. It becomes glaringly obvious Meyers has no clue, nor understanding of what those films life blood is supposed to be, or what fans go to see them for. It yet again begs the question of just why in the hell he wrote this book in the first place.

16. In BLACK ANGELS (1970), Chainer, the leader of the all white gang The Serpents doesn't kill a black biker. The guy accidentally kills himself. Chainer isn't a racist, either. He has nothing against blacks, it's some of the other members in his gang. Also, no one is left alive for the sheriff to have a "vantage point" as you put it. His whole purpose was to get the two gangs to wipe themselves out. At least you got John King III's role in the film right.

17. Where exactly did Terry Levene lie to the public in their promotion for DR. BUTCHER M.D. (1981)? Have you seen the fucking trailer?!

18. THE ABDUCTORS (1972) is the SECOND film in the Ginger series, Ric ol' boy, not the third. The third film is called GIRLS ARE FOR LOVING (1973).

19. Richard Smedley does not play Ginger's boss, either. That role belonged to William Grannel. Since you claim you re-wrote this book, this kinda shit shoulda been corrected.

20. The DOLL SQUAD (1973) and THE HUSTLER SQUAD (1976) are two different movies, Ric; two entirely different countries, too! The former is from the USA and the latter is from the Philippines!

21. Why the hell are their vampire movies in your SEX, DRUGS AND ROCK N ROLL section?! Your whole schism of dividing the book up into sections is pretty damn pointless Ric.

22. "I'm sorry my comments led you to feel that way ... but on the basis of what I've just read, you seem to have a bit of hatred in you as well....?"--Right. I'm embracing my anger and am about to turn into Darth Fucking Vader after these latest Tao of Assholes articles.

23. Among the dozens of movies you trash in this book, Ric, you include COUNT YORGA, VAMPIRE (1970). You poke fun of it as if the film is lacking and all that is lacking is your recollection of it if you've even actually seen it. Without going into great detail, Michael Murphy (the bad guy from CLOAK & DAGGER) is not the hero of the movie and the main female star is not the one who eats the cat.

24. Michael Pataki only played Dracula in a flashback in DRACULA'S DOG, Ric. He's the main protagonist throughout the film.

25. Speaking of bloodsuckers, BLACULA is not destroyed with a stake through the heart. Do you even watch these things?!

26. In your section on THE INCREDIBLY STRANGE CREATURES WHO STOPPED LIVING AND BECAME MIXED UP ZOMBIES (1964), you give a paragraph to that film, then proceed to spend two pages on 'Two-Headed' movies.

27. Jess Franco isn't Mexican, Ric. He's from Spain! That's akin to you and your mixin' and matchin' of Chinese names. When you were FINALLY called on it, your classic response was, "What's the difference?!" Hilarious! Or how about when you throw a tantrum over folks calling kung fu flicks karate movies? See what I did there?

28. Wow, you admit no SCREAM, BLACKENSTEIN, SCREAM followed BLACKENSTEIN, but yet your index lists this faux title as if it did.

29. "To be honest, most of the movies made during this convulsive era were far better to read or hear about than actually see (you're welcome)."--And that's how you "saw" them, too, right? You read and heard about them! You're welcome.

30. Apparently you haven't actually seen MARK OF THE DEVIL (1970), Ric. Everyone knows the infamous ad campaign with the tongue and barf bag, but your mercifully brief synopsis sounds an awful lot like the classic Vincent Price movie, THE WITCHFINDER GENERAL (1968) aka THE CONQUEROR WORM.

31. "I feel that my work 'speaks' for itself."--It certainly does!

32. "...I will not attack your motives the way you have savaged mine."--tell the fucking truth and stop makin' shit up, then!

33. "Thank heaven! After the ignominy of the last few films, here is some good, clean fun."--Pretty much every film you mention in this book is ignominious to you, and if you're looking for good, clean fun, what the FUCK are you doing writing a book on exploitation movies?!

34. On page 109, Meyers topic of discussion is INVASION OF THE BLOOD FARMERS, a 1972 picture he lists as being made in 1977. Meyers pens a brief paragraph summary about the film then spends the next page and a half inexplicably talking about SHRIEK OF THE MUTILATED (1974). Going by his description, it would appear he's actually SEEN the latter picture. This happens a lot in this book; between one and half a dozen other movies get discussed instead of the damn one listed.

35. Exactly how stupid were these people you know who went to see ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON; a boring movie as you put it. Obviously you didn't watch this either, as there's nothing boring in one of Umberto Lenzi's sleaziest movies better known as ROME ARMED TO THE TEETH (1976).

36. On page 60 you say Vernon Zimmerman's FADE TO BLACK (1980) shows "a better grasp of technique than many others...", but then on page 103 you call it misguided?! Then, on page 123 you call it semi-disastrous. So do you like it, or not? Have you even seen it? When you say shit like, "What could have been an incisive, or even wildly entertaining satire was just a pedestrian murder movie with no real bite, flair, style, or flash", it leads me to believe that you actually haven't seen it.

37. THE BLACK GESTAPO (1975) is not a black biker movie. Both the films title and poster should clue you in on that.

38. For a book on exploitation movies, four and a half pages are lavished on THE EXORCIST (1973). Half of those are devoted to EXORCIST style clone movies.

39. Well, either your memory is fuzzy, or you never saw THE CHILDREN from 1980. You don't shoot the irradiated, zombie-like title killers; they're done in by chopping off their hands of all things.

40. None of the acting troupe return to the graveyard to be attacked by real zombies in CHILDREN SHOULDN'T PLAY WITH DEAD THINGS (1972). The two gravediggers stay behind and are attacked by the living dead while everyone else goes back to the house with Orville's corpse.

41. "The only thing stranger than an unqualified gorehound is an "art movie" lover."--That's a riot! You refer to somebody as 'unqualified'!

42. "For the record, I don't hate anyone, no matter how much I might criticize them, and my comments on Run Run were channeled via many Shaw Brothers workers I interviewed over the years. Again, for what it's worth, I'm still trying, still learning, and can't help but feel that at least a few of those instances where I "changed my mind" or said something different, may have been an attempt to pass on newly discovered corrections and information. Maybe."--I especially like that 'maybe' closes out that statement. You like name-dropping so who were these SB workers? Newly discovered bullshit is more like it.

43. Are there two versions of DR. BLACK & MR. HYDE (1976)? Because the one I have, the doctor doesn't desire fitting into white society by concocting a serum to make him white. His research is in regenerating dead liver cells. DEAD LIVER CELLS, Ric. DEAD. LIVER. CELLS.

44. So which version of Bava's BLACK SUNDAY (you list it as a '61 production) is about Satan roaming the earth for one day every century? Do you really mean the one about a curse placed on the family line of a vampiric witch and her satan worshipping lover?

45. Since we're on the subject of Bava, exactly who termed Dario Argento the poor man's Mario Bava?

"Notorious director Matt Cimber cast five real life black football players and one black baseball player to portray the members of a peaceful, law abiding unit of Vietnam vets called THE BLACK SIX, who had to contend with a racist bunch of Caucasian Hell's Angels."--I'm not much of a sports nut, but the leads are all football players. In addition to other NFL players, there's one MLB star, Maury Wills, but he's not one of the Black Six of the films title.

47. Outside of the use of the word 'massacre', how are MEATCLEAVER MASSACRE (1977), HOSPITAL MASSACRE (1982), or THE NORTHFIELD CEMETERY MASSACRE imitations or rip-offs of Hooper's TEXAS CHAINSAW? Wait a minute... something's wrong. What the hell is THE NORTHFIELD CEMETERY MASSACRE, Ric?! You must mean THE NORTHVILLE CEMETERY MASSACRE (1976), a gritty, late blooming biker flick.

"I was paid $750 for my first Martial Arts Movie book, and not much more for the subsequent ones. Believe it or not, I did, and still do it out of love. Apparently often inaccurate, misinformed love, but love nevertheless (I know, I know, with love like that, you don't need hatred)."--While that's a paltry amount for a serious writer tackling their subject respectably, $750.00 is a lofty amount of money to be paid to make shit up. And yet you still will not admit you've made shit up. Considering you did two Bondage movies, your brand of 'love' fits perfectly.

49. Okay, Ric, you slobber all over ILSA, SHE-WOLF OF THE SS (1974), but you get shit mixed up there, too. In spite of you only listing him as 'the visitor', Richard Kennedy plays the general whom you are referring. He doesn't desire to enter Ilsa's bed, either. And he doesn't give her "a small amount of her own medicine." She actually gives him a small amount of HER medicine... in liquid form! She gives him a golden shower, Ric. Maybe Ilsa can tinkle on you and maybe you'll wake the fuck up and get this shit right, jeez.

50. So Jess Franco's shit-fest WANDA/GRETA/ILSA THE WICKED WARDEN (1977) is the sickest film in the series? If you're trying to make up for calling Franco a Mexican, he doesn't forgive you.

"Guys, if you really think I got into this to make a buck by purposefully lying, I can assure you there are a lot of easier ways to make many more bucks than sharing my love (?) of kung fu films with a very uninterested American public (like I could have stayed in fetish films!)."--According to your own self-congratulatory remarks, your Kung Faux books were best sellers. But yes, your whips, chains and giant dildos might be a more satisfying endeavor for you.

52. Oh, shit. You're trying to be philosophical again. I imagine you indulged in mucho beard stroking by page 68. Since you couldn't succinctly explain why slasher films aren't of the horror genre (???) over the course of two pages, perhaps you will explain in the no doubt best selling follow up to this book?

53. "I may have been misinformed, or the research I collected may have been inaccurate (I've been doing this long before there was the web ... in fact, when I started there was pretty much only me trying to share my love of kung fu films with America -- even in HK, where they looked down on kung fu films at the time)."--Right, right, right. None of us knew what those movies were till you enlightened us all. There were folks talking about them before, during and after you, and without the mountainous level of tabloid journalism attached you excel in.

54. I assume your putting movies like HELL NIGHT (1981) in the 'VIOLENCE' section and movies like MARK OF THE DEVIL (1970) in the 'HORROR' section is supposed to make sense?!

55. A book on exploitation movies gives up six pages about HALLOWEEN (1978) and a cameo appearance by DARK STAR (1974).

"But if you don't want to help me improve, or are having too much fun to even consider I might not be a purposely lying, uncaring fabricator, then carry on. I won't try to offer my p.o.v. or my explanations. They would just get in the way of the exhilaration of anonymous character assassination that the net is so good at. Oh well, I tried to improve. Back to my purposeless, insulting 'work'."--There's five sentences in this response. Only one of them is true. Considering the subject, it shouldn't be difficult to pick out the right answer.

57. Haha, Ric, you're makin' shit up again. Nobody gets killed with a saw in THE TOOLBOX MURDERS (1978).

58. Hey! Judging by pages 165 and 166, you've actually seen THE MANITOU (1978)!

59. NIGHT OF A THOUSAND CATS (1972) is a Mexican production, not Spanish. And judging by your description of this one, you've not seen it, either.

60. What the hell version of GRIZZLY (1976) did you watch exactly?! Christopher George does not play the Robert Shaw character from JAWS; nor does Andrew Prine essay the Brody character played by Roy Scheider. You have it backwards--That George is a Park Ranger and Prine is the 'Salt of the Air' should be a damn giveaway. Prine even does a mock Quint Indianapolis speech with Indians and bears instead of naval servicemen and sharks.

61. Even more GRIZZLY is you makin' the movie even more outrageous than it already is. Prine's helicopter does not fire rockets, nor does the damn bear pull the chopper to the ground. For fucks sake, I do hope somebody makes your killer bear movie someday, though!

62. "I will, as I, believe it or not, always have, attempt not to repeat mistakes once I know of the mistake (although I can't control differences of opinion). And I thank you for talking to me. Really. Now have the last word. I will e-walk away afterwards with no excuse or justification, even if you reattack. Best."--And you've repeated A LOT OF'EM! This isn't about differences of opinion, this is about blatant makin' shit up.

63. I close on this excellent and final response from the Ricster in its entirety. Well, this was actually the final FINAL response since he said he wasn't gonna say anything else, then he turned into Sybil and retorted with this major confession.

"Shit. You caught me. I lied. I lied about it all. I don't know why I even tried to fool you about my hatred of kung fu films, Run Run Shaw, fans, and everything. I even lied about not replying again (so you ask me direct questions?!). Yes. I did it for the money. I'm rolling it loads of filthy yuan and am basking in the joy of having happily lied in all those books, articles, and commentaries. I remember it as if it were yesterday, thinking to myself: those fools...FOOLS for believing everything I'm simply making up here.

Of course I'm fluent in Chinese and purposefully mangled all those names just out of pure unadulterated loathing. You're absolutely 100% right: I'm an ego-maniacal hypocrite who does this simply for the ass-kissing, glad-handing, and beard-fetishist babes (also, the 1st book was a comparative best-seller, but the royalties were stretched over 1985-2001 [I also did, indeed, read all your Tao of Asshole columns, so I don't know what the issue is there. But hell, throw it on the lying pile. What do I care at this point?]). So long suckers! I got a whole new generation to lie to with malice aforethought! Bwahahahahaha!"--At least you told the truth for once in your life!


If you wanna start from the beginning and work your way down to the bottom of the barrel, click HERE.

Related Posts with Thumbnails


copyright 2013. All text is the property of and should not be reproduced in whole, or in part, without permission from the author. All images, unless otherwise noted, are the property of their respective copyright owners.