@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @@@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @@@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
Club Notice - 12/19/97 -- Vol. 16, No. 25
MT Chair/Librarian:
Mark Leeper MT 3E-433 732-957-5619 mleeper@lucent.com
HO Chair: John Jetzt MT 2E-530 732-957-5087 jetzt@lucent.com
HO Librarian: Nick Sauer HO 4F-427 732-949-7076 njs@lucent.com
Distinguished Heinlein Apologist:
Rob Mitchell MT 2D-536 732-957-6330 rlmitchell1@lucent.com
Factotum: Evelyn Leeper MT 3E-433 732-957-2070 eleeper@lucent.com
Back issues at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/4824
All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.
The Science Fiction Association of Bergen County meets on the
second Saturday of every month in Upper Saddle River; call
201-933-2724 for details. The New Jersey Science Fiction Society
meets on the third Saturday of every month in Belleville; call
201-432-5965 for details. The Denver Area Science Fiction
Association meets 7:30 PM on the third Saturday of every month at
Southwest State Bank, 1380 S. Federal Blvd.
1. URL of the week:
http://rsc.vic.edu.au/depts/science/sheep/clone.html. Special
issue of THE NEW SCIENTIST devoted to cloning. [-ecl]
===================================================================
2. Maybe it is that great minds think alike or that science fiction
readers think alike, but Robert Silverberg has written an editorial
in the February 1998 ASIMOV'S that could be inspired by one of
mine. He asks why all the fuss over the cloning of a sheep and why
are we all so afraid of human cloning. He also does not rule out
that there could be some terrible consequence, but like me he is
waiting for someone to point out the danger. He is more eloquent
than I am, and he has always been sort of the level-headed
spokesman for science fiction. But he and I are in what I think is
complete agreement. [-ecl]
===================================================================
3. Evelyn is going through the set of films that film critic
Leonard Maltin gives a rating of four stars out of a possible four.
Some of these are films that I have seen years ago, but never saw
as an adult. For example, a local station has shown the Walt
Disney classic animated film DUMBO. The film was made in 1941 and
I saw it on a re-release, but I was about nine years old at the
time. It is interesting to see the film with the eyes of an adult
and to see what it is really about. We have the circus elephant
Mrs. Jumbo wanting and awaiting having a baby elephant. Where is
Mr. Jumbo? Nobody seems to know or at least not to talk about it.
He has long since left the scene. All the other female elephants
looking on expectantly, if not themselves expectant. Then the baby
is born and suddenly we realize that while the mother has the small
ears of an Asian elephant, little Dumbo has the giant ears of an
African elephant. Suddenly Mrs. Jumbo, who till now has seemed
just a little frumpy, takes on a whole new aura. The old girl
clearly has not always been so domesticated as she now seems.
Sometime in her past she has obviously sown her wild peanuts. We
have what must be the first screen story of the offspring of an
inter-racial union. This is pretty strong stuff to take five- and
six-year-olds to see, a sort of children's version of SECRETS AND
LIES. But even the latter film concentrated on the mother, not so
DUMBO. As Dumbo gets older he faces more and more prejudice. His
only friend is another social outcast, a mouse. Dumbo is not
allowed to be himself but makes himself into a clown.
Significantly he plays this role in whiteface. Eventually Dumbo
comes to be accepted, not for himself but by exhibiting a talent of
flying, something that no other elephant has ever been called on to
do. The artificial deus ex machina reminds one of the self-
admittedly absurd ending of Bertold Brecht's THREE-PENNY OPERA.
DUMBO is a fairly gritty and serious movie. I suspect that a lot
of what the adults were seeing that year was mild by comparison.
The film that won the Oscar for Best Picture that year was the
somewhat sugary HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY. In a world on the brink
of war in this country, already engulfed elsewhere, the adult
population was having their hearts warmed by hearing a paternal
Walter Pidgeon give positive philosophical life-lessons to a young
Roddy McDowell. Meanwhile the kids at the matinees were seeing
hard-hitting social allegories like DUMBO. I wonder if this led to
a more serious-minded generation whose matinee fare was films like
DUMBO and low-budget Westerns. I don't know how many of these you
have seen but they are real paranoia pieces where as often as not
the theme was authority figures, bank owners and town sheriffs, who
were in secret conspiracies with evil, desperate men. The young
crowd worried about the state of the world with older brothers
going off to war and they when they escaped to the movies the world
was just as dark. This could be why in the 50s, when you would
have expected a lot of fantasy films catering to the veterans who
had seen enough pain in their time, instead we get heavy social
dramas like THE EDGE OF THE CITY and even the crime films were
serious film noir efforts like THE ASPHALT JUNGLE. I think if we
looked at the bleak nature of children's entertainment of in the
pre-war era it helps to explain a lot of what we are seeing today
when many of those children are now in government and are the
captains of industry. [-mrl]
===================================================================
4. EVE'S BAYOU (a film review by Mark R. Leeper):
Capsule: A ten-year-old Creole girl grows up
during one hot Louisiana summer. Director and
writer Kasi Lemmons draws some very nicely
defined characters for whom the viewer has real
interest and empathy. One of the most touching
and engrossing films of the year. It is also
very well photographed with some very memorable
images. Rating: 7 (0 to 10) +2 (-4 to +4)
New York Critics: 14 positive, 1 negative, 5
mixed
The year is supposedly 1962, though there is a timelessness to the
narrative. Eve Batiste (played by Jurnee Smollett) narrates the
story and begins by saying this is the year that she killed her
father. That statement hangs over the entire film and gives what
seems to be a series of random remembered incidents a direction,
though the viewer is unsure how figuratively or literally she means
she killed her father. Eve lives on the bayou in the town of Eve's
Bayou. Her father, Louis (Samuel L. Jackson) is the attractive
town doctor who has a tendency to fool around with his more
attractive female patients, cheating on his wife Roz (Lin
Whitfield). Also in the family are Eve's older sister Cisely
(Meagan Good), her young brother Poo, and Louis's sister Mozelle
Batiste Delacroix (Debbie Morgan). Louis gives Eve the impression
that he prefers his oldest daughter over her, and Eve feels the
sting of that rejection as well as feeling a little bit left out.
One evening Eve catches her father making love to the wife of a
friend and this starts things changing in the family. Eve does not
want to believe what she has seen but is only half willing to
accept her sister Cisely's fabricated explanation that it was all
innocent. And the matter remains in both sisters' minds.
Writer/director Kasi Lemmons makes this one of several stories
unfolding at the same time. Aunt Mozelle is a seer with psychic
abilities to see into the lives of others, but cannot use her
powers to help herself: she has outlived multiple husbands and
blames herself for their deaths.
The film at no time ties itself to any current events outside of
the community of Eve's Bayou, Louisiana. For that matter, in spite
of a black cast of characters, the subject of race is totally
absent. Virtually the same story could have been told in the white
or the Chinese community, for example, with only minor alterations.
One such modification might have to involve the acceptance of
voodoo in this story. This is a world in which fortune tellers and
psychics are authentic. The acceptance of magic is not the main
thrust of the film but it adds to the texture. An old voodoo
priestess seems to be half sham, yet her magic appears to work.
She is nicely played by Diahann Carroll in a real departure from
her squeaky clean image back when she was one of the first female
black leads in a TV show.
It pretty much goes without saying that Lemmons would get a good
performance from the likes of Carroll and Jackson. These are
well-established actors who will give good performances as second
nature. It is perhaps a different talent to get good performances
from children. Getting an acceptable and by-the- numbers
performance from them is not difficult but getting a performance
with some depth is a lot harder, because children frequently are
overconfident in front of a camera and do not know how to control a
performance. As the lead Smollett has to carry the film without
reducing it to a children's film, and her performance is fully up
to adult standards. She apparently understands acting and that
makes a real difference to the film. Meagan Good as the somewhat
enigmatic older sister does not have as much to do, but also gives
a very solid performance. Amy Vincent's cinematography includes at
least a few very effective images and adds greatly to flavor of the
film.
EVE'S BAYOU is a rich and emotional look at one small community and
is not a bad debut writing and directing effort by Kasi Lemmons. I
give it a 7 on the 0 to 10 scale and a 2 on the -4 to +4 scale.
[-mrl]
===================================================================
5. AMISTAD (a film review by Mark R. Leeper):
Capsule: Steven Spielberg's account of the
slave mutiny of 1839 and its legal aftermath is
certainly a good historical film, filled with
facts and historical details. Occasionally it
is actually powerful. But it lacks some of the
emotional impact of THE COLOR PURPLE and
SCHINDLER'S LIST and its pacing is off. Still,
it is a useful and engaging source of
historical perspective. Rating: 8 (0 to 10),
high +2 (-4 to +4). A minor potential spoiler
follows the main review.
In one of those delightful ironies of history the ship was called
La Amistad--Spanish for "friendship" or "friendliness." In fact,
the ship was anything but friendly. Its primary cargo was black
people being brought in chains from Cuba to the United States, a
country just sixty-three years old and whose current President,
Martin Van Buren would be the last President to have been born
owing allegiance to the Crown of England. In this summer of 1839
off the coast of Cuba some fifty-three slaves chained up in the
hold of the ship would break from their bonds take control of the
ship. Taking command was Sengbe Pieh whom the Spanish had renamed
Cinque (played with surprising power by Djimon Hounsou). His plan
was to force the crew of the ship to sail back to Africa, but they
tricked him and instead sailed north up the coast of the United
Stated. An American Navy man-of-war captured La Amistad off of
Long Island, New York. The ship could have been hauled to a New
York harbor or to Connecticut. It was taken to New Haven,
Connecticut to increase the salvage value. New York law said that
nobody could own anyone else and the blacks on board would be
considered passengers. Connecticut still allowed slavery and the
blacks were legally cargo that could be sold.
Steven Spielberg's new film tells the story of the legal battle
that followed the ship Amistad arrival and the question of whether
the blacks on board would be slaves or free men. It was an issue
that made opponents of current President Van Buren (played in the
film version by Nigel Hawthorne--with no small borrowing from his
role in THE MADNESS OF KING GEORGE) and former President John
Quincy Adams (Anthony Hopkins), now a doddering old man and member
of the House of Representatives. Van Buren, already unpopular due
to a recession resulting from Andrew Jacksons policies, is anxious
to placate Southern voters who could make the difference in the
elections the following year. Van Buren also wants to placate
Spain's eleven-year-old Queen Isabella II (Anna Paquin) who
believes that the slaves are Spanish property. Both sides in the
controversy are aware that this could be a powder keg that would
lead the country into a civil war over the issue of slavery.
Coming to the aid of the blacks are two abolitionists, former slave
Theodore Joadson (Morgan Freeman) and a Mr. Tappen (Stellan
Skarsgard). They bring aboard a real estate lawyer named Baldwin
(Matthew McConaughey). But Baldwin has his work cut out for him.
He has no language in common with his clients and does not even
know if they come from Africa or Cuba, an issue pivotal to the
case. The screenplay for this film is based on the book BLACK
MUTINY by William Owens and is adapted by David H. Franzoni. The
latter's only previous screen writing was the story for the Whoopi
Goldberg vehicle JUMPIN' JACK FLASH. It is rumored that for him to
make a script of this quality he needed the help of perhaps the
best current screenwriter, Steven Zaillian of SCHINDLER'S LIST and
LOOKING FOR BOBBY FISCHER.
One weakness of this film is that apart from a few very powerful
scenes, AMISTAD is very much a cold account of a court case.
Because the blacks who are on trial are strong and for the most
part silent we get only rare glimpses at emotions we can share with
them. The viewer is angered that they are being denied justice but
gets very little understanding for the characters. Their plight is
more compelling than they themselves are. Cinque is never a fully
three-dimensional person, though we do see a bit of his self-doubt.
The only character who is anywhere near fully developed is Matthew
McConaughey's. We seem to be seeing a lot of McConaughey these
days, but he is not the most emotive actor. Anthony Hopkins plays
John Quincy Adams as what old age has left of a once fascinating
man, but who now colorful without being really interesting. He
bores people with his flowers and plays small practical jokes in
the House of Representatives. When he gives an eloquent speech it
rates about a 7 where 10 is Lincoln at Gettysburg and 0 is Steven
Seagal anywhere.
Spielberg had a difficult fight wanting to make SCHINDLER'S LIST
(mostly) in black and white. Here he creates much of the same
effect by subduing the color scheme in the set design and probably
also by photographic filters. He then makes the only bright colors
of the film the blood during the mutiny. In this way he can
underscore the violence of his film in a year of so many bloody
films. Be warned that in that same violent year perhaps the most
jarring scene I remember is AMISTAD's depiction of a man being
killed by a sword. The mutiny, lit only by lightning, is the first
thing we see in AMISTAD but nonetheless is the centerpiece of the
entire film. Spielberg does have a nice visual sense that comes
out in this scene and elsewhere showing the blacks in impressive
silhouette to make them look larger. Spielberg creates some
additional tension by letting the viewer from the start of the film
go a long, long time, perhaps fifteen minutes, without any English
in the dialog or on the screen. That itself becomes a little
wearing.
Others of the film's touches I question: the mutineers aboard the
Amistad having fashioned for themselves turbans made from what
appear to be American flags. It is not clear where they would find
what would be three or four American flags on a Spanish ship. Also
the Capitol building at this point had a ring of pillars at the top
and ended there. The actual dome was not added until early in
Lincoln's second term. We see it, however, fully domed. Just as
the Capitol Building was incomplete, so was the Supreme Court.
There were eight judges, not nine. The latter was pointed out by
Gore Vidal in an article for THE NEW YORKER. Van Buren appears a
dithering incompetent. This is perhaps unfair. He was merely a
second-rate President having to clean up a mess left by our first
second-rate President, Andrew Jackson.
The Jewish Steven Spielberg has now made two stirring films on
Black History and one on Jewish History. If he can manage to
reconcile tensions between those two communities he will be
deserving of more than Oscars. I rate AMISTAD an 8 on the 0 to 10
scale and a high +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Generally when I review a history film I like to look up the
incidents in multiple history books and add information to my
review to broaden the context and correct misimpressions left by
the film. In this instance my collection of history books have
been nearly unanimous in omitting the Amistad Incident. Even
Howard Zinn's A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES which
concentrates on injustice and minorities appears to omit the
incident. Of course, any historian writing a history is forced to
choose the incidents he feels willing to cover, but it is
surprising to see this particular incident so ignored and rescued
from obscurity by Black History courses and by Steven Spielberg.
Spoiler Spoiler Spoiler
Another touch that is wearing: in general the film is deliberately
paced and comes to a conclusion, then the viewer discovers the film
runs its own stop sign and just keeps going. It was a pleasant
surprise when Spielberg did that in POLTERGEIST, but here it goes
just a bit too long with too little reward. It needed a more power
behind the speech by Adams. [-mrl]
Mark Leeper
MT 3E-433 732-957-5619
mleeper@lucent.com
Life is not so bad if you have plenty of luck,
a good physique, and not too much imagination.
-- Christopher Isherwood
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT ALMOST BLANK