THE MT VOID
02/17/23 -- Vol. 41, No. 34, Whole Number 2263
Co-Editor: Mark Leeper,
mleeper@optonline.net
Co-Editor: Evelyn Leeper,
eleeper@optonline.net
Sending Address:
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
All material is the opinion of the author and is copyrighted by the
author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to
eleeper@optonline.net
The latest issue is at <
http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm>.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at <
http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm>.
Topics:
Mini Reviews, Part 13 (AMSTERDAM, THE FABELMANS, TED K)
(film reviews by Mark R. Leeper
and Evelyn C. Leeper)
ORPHANS OF THE SKY by Robert A. Heinlein (audio book
review by Joe Karpierz)
THE WOMAN KING (letter of comment by Gary McGath)
HAY BEFORE THE BOOKSHOPS (letter of comment
by John Kerr-Mudd)
FLESH GORDON, BROS, MOUNTAIN IN THE SEA, and Worldcon
(letter of comment by Heath Row)
This Week's Reading (re-reading books) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Mini Reviews, Part 13 (film reviews by Mark R. Leeper and
Evelyn C. Leeper)
This is the thirteenth batch of mini-reviews, all based on real
people:
AMSTERDAM: AMSTERDAM starts in the 1930s, but then jumps back to
World War I and its aftermath before returning to the 1930s. The
production design by Judy Becker and art direction by Danielle
Osborne and Alexander Wei, the cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki,
and the script by David O. Russell all capture both periods. The
former period includes surrealist art, the latter Dadaist poetry.
(Margot Robie became so interested in the art that she actually
created some of the pieces used in the film.) And the ensemble
cast (which includes Christian Bale, Margot Robie, John David
Washington. Chris Rock, Michael Shannon, Zoe Saldana, Mike Myers,
Rami Malek, and Robert De Niro) allows for a wide range of
characterizations. Though most of the characters are fictional,
the historical basis for the story is real.
Released theatrically 7 October 2022. Rating: low +3 (-4 to +4) or
8/10
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10304142/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/amsterdam_2022>
THE FABELMANS: THE FABELMANS is Steven Spielberg's
semi-autobiographical film, but it really adds little new to what
is already known about Spielberg. We see Spielberg as a boy
creating scenarios, inventing special effects, and learning how to
edit. In one short sequence we learn how Spielberg became
Spielberg.
The film is actually the adventures of one family (much as Barry
Levinson's AVALON is). It is allegedly a very accurate
representation of the Spielberg family. The young Sammy (Steven
under a nom de screen) is a character both obnoxious and likable,
and the film itself is an interesting experiment, a different way
of telling a story through home movies.
But how often do you see Hanukkah shown on the big screen? In the similarly-themed AVALON, Levinson sticks to secular holidays:
Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Washington's Birthday, and so on.
In fact, AVALON is an interesting parallel. Both films are about
Jewish families, and memory. But THE FABELMANS emphasizes the
Jewishness, while AVALON avoids almost any mention of it. (We see
one Star of David in the cemetery towards the end, and Some Yiddish
is spoken, but even talk of concentration camps doesn't mention
Jewishness.)
And in AVALON, the emphasis is on how faulty memory can be, not
just people disagreeing as to when something happened, or if
something was a train or a streetcar, but things the audience can
see. We see Sam bringing home the piano in the pouring rain, but
he describes it later as being a beautiful sunny day. Whereas in
THE FABELMANS Sammy (the Steven Spielberg character) doesn't rely
on memory; he relies on movies, which both lie (as in all the
fictional scenarios he sets up) and tell the truth (as in the
candid films of his mother).
And sometimes you feel the camera reveals too much, not just in the
storyline, but in real life. (Or as they say, the camera doesn't
lie--which of course it can.)
As noted, this is not a terrifically original or interesting plot,
and Spielberg might be pulling from the plot more than there was in
the first place. Once before, Spielberg made a comedy and it
turned into 1941. In THE FABELMANS, Spielberg is once again
Spielberg making a comedy of teenagers. Neither film works and
both films were amazingly below expectations. Maybe his heart just
isn't in it.
But Spielberg is a consummate director, as the nice understated
touch in the final scene shows.
Released theatrically 23 November 2022. Rating: +2 (-4 to +4) or
7/10
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14208870/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_fabelmans>
TED K: TED K is the story of Ted Kaczynski, a.k.a. the Unabomber.
The film starts with scenes reminiscent of a movie posse on
snowmobiles, showing how the modern world has encroached about
nature. Kaczynski watches, believing that modern civilization has
ruined the world, and then goes back to his cabin far from
civilization and people he knows (but which also has a radio and a
modern rifle). Kaczynski uses a trail bike to get around in this
mountainous territory, and vandalizes power lines (and fancy
cabins). He has thoughts both of violent images and of romantic
scenes.
The plot advances very slowly because while the individual scenes
are long (and scored with popular music of the time), they do not
do much to advance the plot. As Ted Kaczynski, Sharlto Copley
(probably best known for DISTRICT 9) really carries this film.
Warning: there is some backal nudity, but any frontal scenes are
cleverly staged to obscure critical areas.
Released theatrically 18 February 2022. Rating: +1 (-4 to +4) or
6/10
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8128276/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ted_k>
[-mrl/ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: ORPHANS OF THE SKY by Robert A. Heinlein (copyright 1941
Astounding Science Fiction, 2017 Blackstone Audio, 4 hours 29
minutes, ASIN B07562BBKH, narrated by Graham Halstead) (audio book
review by Joe Karpierz)
I've probably said this before, but I'll say it again. I didn't
read any Robert A. Heinlein in my formative science fiction years.
Like a lot of people, I read a parent's--in my case, my
mother's--collection of science fiction books, and she did not have
any books by Heinlein. So, I'm pretty much late to the party, as
it were.
I picked up ORPHANS OF THE SKY as a cheap, maybe even free (I don't
remember, but then again it's not that important, I suppose) audio
book from Audible a while back. Looking for something quick and
short to get through a couple of weeks ago, I finally decided to
start listening to it. I was underwhelmed.
ORPHANS OF THE SKY is a generation starship story, if not the first
then one of the first of that subgenre of science fiction. The
ship is the Vanguard, heading toward Far Centaurus from the now
mythical planet Earth on a journey financed and sponsored by the
Jordan Foundation. Some time during the trip there was a mutiny
amongst the crew, and since that time the survivors descended into
a much simpler life, forgetting most of the technological advances
that they came aboard with. In fact, they don't even remember that
they are actually aboard a ship travelling to a distant location.
It is a hierarchical society, with officers and "scientists" taking
care of the ship, and the rest of the inhabitants being simple
farmers. I was reminded of Peter F. Hamilton's "Arkship" trilogy,
which took place on a generational starship headed for a new planet
on which humanity could live, but which also had a "mutiny" (albeit
not really a mutiny, but that's a different review) which resulted
in the inhabitants reverting back to a farming life. As I listened
to ORPHANS OF THE SKY, I wondered whether Hamilton was influenced
by Heinlein's book, and I'm sure that if I poked around the
interwebs hard enough I'd find the answer to that question. The
inhabitants of the Vanguard don't believe there is an actual voyage
to a place called Far Centaurus. Rather, they believe the voyage
is metaphorical, a journey of religious significance. The idea
that the ship could move is considered preposterous. The ship is
the ship. It is all there is. How would it move and where would
it move to?
The inhabitants of the Vanguard live in constant fear of the muties
(or mutants), humans who were affected by radiation in the upper
parts of the ship. Hugh Hoyland is selected to be a scientist, one
of the people who tend to the needs of the ship, feeding to the
generators which keep life support. He goes on a mutie hunting
expedition, and is captured by the two-headed by Bobo, a
microcephalic dwarf who takes him to his boss, the two headed
Joe-Jim. Joe-Jim initially enslaves Hugh, but as the story
progresses shows Hugh that the voyage and the ship are real. The
remainder of the story deals with Hugh trying to convert and
convince his friends and others to believe in the mission and aid
in its completion.
ORPHANS OF THE SKY consists of two novellas: "Universe", published
in ASTOUNDING SCIENCE FICTION in May of 1941, and its sequel
"Common Sense", published in ASTOUNDING SCIENCE FICTION in October
of 1941. It is considered a classic in the field, and as noted
earlier, it's one of the first generational starship stories. I'm
sure it was groundbreaking back in its day, and while it seems to
hold up fairly well given the time in which it was written, I
didn't find it all that extraordinary. And it's definitely a
product of its time. While I can live with the anachronisms
inherent in books that are more than 80 years old (I actually had
to look at that number as I was typing it and decide if I was doing
the math right), the misogyny depicted near the end of the novel is
very hard to take. Either Heinlein is trying to show that the
human race has fallen so far during its years on the ship that it
treats females as inferior beings, or he believed that they were
indeed inferior--at least at the time he wrote the story. I would
like to give him more credit than it looks like he deserves, but
his later novels, while written differently with regard to the
treatment of his female characters, still seem to have Neanderthal
attitudes towards women.
Even the narrator, Graham Halstead, sounds like something of a
throwback to some of the earlier narrators that I listened to.
While his reading cadence and tone are pleasant enough, there is no
effort to use different voices to distinguish between characters.
While I would be okay with listening to other novels narrated by
Halstead, compared to narrators such as Mary Robinette Kowal, Wil
Wheaton, or Jefferson Mays, he falls far short--in my opinion. The
listener's mileage may vary.
Maybe we can make allowances for this being early Heinlein, as we
know that many of his later novels, especially those of the 1960s
like STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND, THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS, and
STARSHIP TROOPERS, are classics. ORPHANS OF THE SKY, well, not so
much. [-jak]
===================================================================
TOPIC: THE WOMAN KING (letter of comment by Gary McGath)
In response to Mark and Evelyn's review of THE WOMAN KING in the
02/10/23 issue of the MT VOID, Gary McGath writes:
[Mark and Evelyn wrote,] "The specifics of THE WOMAN KING are
fictional, but most of the generalities are accurate, except for
the personality of King Ghezo and the position of Ghezo and the
head of the Agojie regarding slavery. In the film, they oppose it;
in real life Ghezo was one of the worst slavers in West Africa."
[-mrl/ecl]
Portraying the slavers as the good guys is a pretty big "except."
[-gmg]
===================================================================
TOPIC: HAY BEFORE THE BOOKSHOPS (letter of comment by John
Kerr-Mudd)
In response to Evelyn's comments on HAY BEFORE THE BOOKSHOPS in the
02/10/23 issue of the MT VOID, John Kerr-Mudd writes:
[Evelyn wrote,] "HAY BEFORE THE BOOKSHOPS by Bridget Ashton"
She's a Gubbins now (<
https://www.bridgetgubbins.co.uk/>)
[Hay] was an interesting border market town. The hardware store
was a wonder to a little kid; you grown-ups could buy nails by the
bucketload. Literally. The Three Tuns would have been just
settling into its fifty-year delapadation about then. (Caveat--I
never went inside). The trains went with Beeching in '63. [-jkm]
===================================================================
TOPIC: FLESH GORDON, BROS, MOUNTAIN IN THE SEA, and Worldcon
(letter of comment by Heath Row)
Happy Valentine's Day! This morning, I wished my wife the same
upon waking, and prepared Pillsbury Orange Rolls with orange icing
for a special weekday breakfast, a rare treat. Our local grocery
store doesn't always stock orange rolls, but I associate them with
holidays such as today. Valentine's Day isn't a big deal for us
usually, especially on a work day, but I gave Caitlin a Valentine's
card and traditional heart-shaped box of assorted chocolates, and
we'll most likely seek takeout from a neighborhood restaurant for
dinner tonight. My standing movie night with a friend was
postponed this week because of the day. Last week, we watched
FLESH GORDON.I thought I knew what kind of movie FLESH GORDON was,
for decades. Decades! And I was wrong. Yes, it's a nudie flick.
Yes, there are portions that are downright pornographic. But that
is far from what the movie is, on the whole. My inspiration for
finally watching it, on the Henstooth Video Blu-ray, was that Bjo
Trimble served as makeup designer in the makeup department for the
film. As mentioned in her memoir "On the Good Ship Enterprise"
(Telegraphs & Tar Pits #45)and confirmed by IMDb, she also played a
role in SUPERBMAN: THE OTHER MOVIE, served as costume designer for
THE FURTHER ADVENTURES OF MAJOR MARS, and was uncredited as
wardrobe mistress for THE INCREDIBLE 2-HEADED TRANSPLANT.
In any event, Trimble's makeup work is on fine display throughout
FLESH GORDON, particularly in terms of William Hunt's portrayal of
Emperor Wang the Perverted. I'm not entirely sure that it's the
case, but it seems that Hunt's Wang wears more and more makeup,
increasingly garish, as the movie proceeds. The makeup is notable.
What's even more notable, however, is how strong an homage the
movie pays to the serials of yore, including the 13-chapter 1936
"Flash Gordon" starring Buster Crabbe. That is what it should be
known for--as a loving tribute to serials--not as a nudie picture.
(The producers even edited the movie to avoid an X rating, in the
end earning a rating of R.) Given the removal of hardcore
pornography, FLESH GORDON should be a midnight movie staple, right
up there with THE ROCKYHORROR PICTURE SHOW and EL TOPO. In fact,
the movie even utilizes traditional serial wipes, some of them
quite elaborate, and the movie predates George Lucas's STAR WARS by
three years. In addition to Trimble, the crew included other people
noteworthy to sf media fen. Special effects artists included Dave
Allen, Rick Baker, Jim Danforth (as Mij Htrofnad), Greg Jein, and
Mike Minor. The set design is excellent, as are the models.
George Barr designed and illustrated the poster. Cornelius Cole
III's animated opening title credits are amazing, reminiscent of
the work of Terry Gilliam and Jiri Trnka Studio's FANTASTIC PLANET.
And fan and author Tom Reamy worked on properties for the art
department. The movie also features stop-motion animation,
including a creature called the Great God Porno, which special
effects crew members named Nesuahyrrahas tribute to Ray
Harryhausen. The other examples of stop-motion animation are also
impressive.
In 1975, the movie was nominated for a Hugo Award in the Best
Dramatic Presentation category. FLESH GORDON lost out to YOUNG
FRANKENSTEIN and ranked among other nominees including PHANTOM OF
THE PARADISE, THE QUESTOR TAPES, and ZARDOZ.
The movie is impressively produced, almost overshadowing its script
and the acting undertaken by Jason Williams as Flesh hisself,
Suzanne Fields as Dale Ardor, Joseph Hudgins as Dr. Flexi Jerkoff
(best character name!), and Mycle Brandy as Prince Precious.
Hudgins and Brandy stand out as the actors to watch most intently,
delivering solid performances despite the limitations of the
script. Craig T. Nelson's voice for the Great God Porno was added
as an afterthought and is delightfully lackadaisical for such an
awe-inspiring creature. The movie was safe enough to watch with a
friend, but I'm not sure I'd watch it with my wife or recommend it
to another couple. Yet here I am. It is Valentine's Day, after
all, so I thought I'd share my thoughts.
I read and enjoyed MT VOID #2258-2260. My wife also recently
watched BROS, on a return flight from Portugal, and enjoyed it.
She said it made her cry, inspiring her to turn to lighter fare:
episodes of "Resident Alien" (T&T #49-50). An octopus plays a
noteworthy role in that program, which resonates with Evelyn's
remarks on Ray Nayler's THE MOUNTAIN IN THE SEA.
Like you, I will not be going to the Worldcon in Chengdu. But I'm
looking forward to this weekend's Gallifrey One "Doctor Who" con,
and the roleplaying game event OrcCon, at which I'll run a session
using FASA's 1985 "Doctor Who" rules. It's not difficult for me
not to go to Worldcon--yet. The only one I've attended so far was
the 2020 CoNZealand online. I'm still a local confan, but I'm sure
that'll change with time.
Putting it on a tight beam. [-hr]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
My sister-in-law asked me if I ever re-read any of our books. I
was going to send her an email, but then I figured why waste it
when I could get a column out of it?
Some books I re-read because one of our book groups is discussing
it. Others get re-read because I've just seen a movie based on it.
But some get re-read just because I want to. And because I'm a
compulsive list-maker, I actually have a list of all the books I've
read since 1992.
To start with, the list says I've read about 5500 books in the last
thirty years, with about 300 of those being re-reads. (It's hard
to tell precisely, since I was not always consistent in how I
entered author's names, or even titles.) The list is of books, so
it doesn't always include short stories. I've certainly re-read
many Sherlock Holmes stories, and many of Jorge Luis Borges's,
Somerset Maugham's, and Ted Chiang's stories. In books, the ones
I've read more than twice include William Shakespeare's CORIOLANUS,
Arthur Miller's DEATH OF A SALESMAN, J. R. R. Tolkien's THE HOBBIT,
Rudyard Kipling's KIM, and several Raymond Chandler's "Philip
Marlowe" books, Jane Austen books, Agatha Christie books. The
"leaders of the pack" though, would be China Mieville's THE CITY &
THE CITY and Herman Melville's MOBY DICK, both of which I have read
at least five times in the last thirty years. (My readings of MOBY
DICK include the very close reading I did when writing my
"Annotations and Thoughts on Moby Dick", my book-length commentary
on it [<
http://leepers.us/evelyn/mobydick.htm>].)
I haven't tracked audiobooks, but I have listened to Andy Weir's
THE MARTIAN many times (and read the book thrice). Josephine Tey's
DAUGHTER OF TIME is another one that I have listened to more times
than I can count--Derek Jacobi's voice is irresistible. [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Dogs have families. Cats have staff.
--Anonymous
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)