@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @@@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @@@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
Club Notice - 03/06/98 -- Vol. 16, No. 36
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 irregularly; call 201-652-0534 for details, or check
http://www.interactive.net/~kat/njsfs.html. 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://pubpages.unh.edu/~ss1/bookaminute/.
Book-A-Minute science fiction and fantasy, for those of you who
have no time to read anymore. [-ecl]
===================================================================
2. "Notes on a Biological Imbalance in an Upland Arizona Valley."
That is how it starts. Science fiction abounds in stories of
conflicts of humans against aliens. The aliens are usually thinly
disguised Nazis. Or they are the threat of Communism. E.T. was a
child from outer space. Klaatu was a reframing of Jesus Christ.
THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD was basically a clever bear. The
aliens in THE WAR OF THE WORLDS are actually just a super-version
of British Imperialists. Aliens are almost never really alien.
The closest thing to a portrayal of humans against a really alien
enemy is in PHASE IV. This is a film directed by Saul Bass. Bass
is the Vincent Van Gogh of film title sequences. When filmmakers
wanted to give their film a distinctive look, they called on Bass.
Back in the 60s you started seeing a lot of companies simplify
their logos. Bell went from having a logo that was basically a
coin with a picture of a bell to a blue circle with a very simple
outline of a bell inside. That was the visual styling of Saul
Bass. He did a similar simplification of the Quaker Oats logo.
Bass created the look and the credits for films like EXODUS and
ANATOMY OF A MURDER. He also did credit sequences for films like
NINE HOURS TO RAMA and WALK ON THE WILD SIDE. He brought
considerable intellect and visual style to the one film he
directed, PHASE IV.
An entomologist (Nigel Davenport) notices peculiar behavior from
the ant colonies in one small area of the Arizona desert. Ant
colonies that usually are bitter enemies start cooperating against
common predators. He invites a mathematician (Michael Murphy) to
join him for some "science in the sun." Instead they find
themselves in at the beginning of a war between two mutually alien
species. Most of what the two sides do is attempt to gain
intelligence about their enemy. The humans take advantage of their
size; the ants take advantage of their small size and their
numbers. The ant photography, incidentally, is terrific.
The Leeperhouse film festival will show PHASE IV on Thursday, March
12, 7:30 PM.
(Just for yuks, this is a partial list of other films for which
Bass did striking credits: THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN ARM, AROUND THE
WORLD IN 80 DAYS, VERTIGO, BONJOUR TRISTESSE, NORTH BY NORTHWEST,
SPARTACUS, PSYCHO, WEST SIDE STORY, and ADVISE AND CONSENT.) [-
mrl]
===================================================================
3. DARK CITY (a film review by Mark R. Leeper):
Capsule: This film is an incredible visual
experience and a story unusually dense in
ideas. Still, I defy anybody to see it only
once and still recall the full arc of the story
24 hours later. The style is much closer to
Japanese anime or comic book than it is to
film. Characters are little more than flat
paper stand-ups, but the visual aspects of this
cinema comic book are a real knockout. This is
a film that goes in for quantity of ideas
though not necessarily quality. You will not
see too many American films that are a lot like
DARK CITY. Rating: 7 (0 to 10), +2 (-4 to +4)
It was a dark and ominous night. The city was a dangerous place
that had no pity for the weak. An alien race "older than time" but
now on the brink of dying out had came to the city to observe
humans hoping to learn something that would enable them to save
themselves. John Murdoch awoke in a bathtub to find he had no
memories and there was a murdered woman nearby with mystical
symbols carved into her body. Somewhere a clock was striking
midnight.
The images and the ideas come and go almost that fast in DARK CITY.
This is a film that owes its style not so much to other films but
to European New Wave comic books. A new idea or a piece of visual
excitement flashes by the viewer at a rate of about two a minute.
This is certainly an impressive style of film-making but it does
carry with it a risk. In a story in which anything can happen at
any time it is hard to care what is happening at any moment. DARK
CITY will never be remembered as a thumping good story, but the
film has other rewards. Stylistically the film is a lot like CITY
OF LOST CHILDREN or BRAZIL, but without the sympathetic characters
of those films. So the dynamic of the film is not to make the
viewer feel much empathy for the characters but just to wonder what
will happen next, what will it mean, and what will it look like.
In fact, the city itself is the most engaging and certainly the
most dynamic character of the film. The city looks like something
out of the 30s and it is invested with aliens, human-looking but
pale and hairless dressed in black bowlers and black fur-collared
coats like the aristocratic gangsters in Fritz Lang's M.
Alex Proyas wrote the story, co-wrote the screenplay, and directs.
His CROW was a nimble translation of comic book style to the wide
screen. DARK CITY goes much further in his stylistic experiments.
In rapid flashes his story piles idea on idea without stopping
longer than a quick muse to think about the implication. The
viewer and the characters is doused in a shower of plot
complications and new ideas with little time to consider them. As
one complains "I have a jigsaw puzzle in front of me and each time
I rearrange the pieces it still doesn't make any sense." But as
with THE BIG SLEEP, what is most important is not the understanding
of the plot but in the going along for the ride. This is a study
in mood and texture and a very different sort of science fiction
film from STARSHIP TROOPERS.
But visually the film is often stunning. The city has a film
noir-ish feel that fully reflects the title. Rufus Sewell of COLD
COMFORT FARM and DANGEROUS BEAUTY does not get much chance to
register much emotion besides bewilderment. He becomes a sort of
place-holder and a cipher in more ways than one. Keifer Sutherland
is a terrific half-mad scientist who might have been at home in
DR. X. Jennifer Connelly is terrific in the scenes as a torch
singer, but registers the same lack of depth as Sewell otherwise.
William Hurt is a Bogart-like police inspector with nearly the same
style. Rounding out the cast are the always enjoyable Richard
O'Brien and Ian Richardson as white-faced aliens.
This is a film with the texture of nightmare. It does not pay off
in ways that most films do so it will appeal only to a narrow
audience. But for what it is it is very nicely realized. It
certainly is one of the most enjoyable surprises of the new year.
I rate it a 7 on the 0 to 10 scale and a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.
I wonder if I am the only viewer to see strong parallels between
this film and Harlan Ellison's OUTER LIMITS episode "The Demon with
a Glass Hand." (I rather suspect that Ellison will. But then he
managed to convince a jury that TERMINATOR borrowed from his
"Soldier from Tomorrow" story rather than the more obvious choice
of the science fiction film CYBORG 2087.) [-mrl]
===================================================================
4. MR RINYO-CLACTON'S OFFER by Russell Hoban (Jonathan Cape, ISBN
0-224-05121-0, 1998, 182pp, L14.99) (a book review by Evelyn C.
Leeper):
There has been much discussion of magical realism in
rec.arts.sf.written these days, and I think I would classify this
as magical realism. That is, of course, a meaningless statement,
since the real question is not what category this fits into, but
what this is about, and what it says.
The offer in question is the following: Mr Rinyo-Clacton will give
Jonathan Fitch a million pounds in exchange for the right to
terminate Fitch's life any time after a year has passed. Fitch,
who has just lost his girlfriend and his job, agrees. One thing
leads to another, and the next morning he wakes up realizing that
he may have contracted the HIV virus as well.
Now, from a strictly logical standpoint, this makes no sense: if he
thinks he's going to die in a year, why worry about a virus which
doesn't even show up in a test for three months and would almost
definitely not progress from an HIV+ condition to AIDS in a year?
(I know people who have been HIV+ for many years now, and they have
not yet developed AIDS.) But people are not rational, particularly
about death.
One of the cliches about AIDS (and by extension, about the HIV
virus) is that those who having it are "living with a death
sentence." But we all are. Anyone could be hit by a truck, or
choke on a piece of food. It's just that they know it, and we
don't. So Fitch's reactions are perfectly reasonable, in a bizarre
way: he is more concerned about the HIV virus that he *may* have,
than about the agreement he signed selling his death in a year.
Something--the media? one hates to blame them for everything, so
maybe it's human irrationality as reported and spread by the
media--something has convinced Fitch that the *possibility* of
death from AIDS at some unspecified future time is a more serious
concern than the virtual certainty of death from Mr Rinyo-Clacton
at the end of a year.
I presume that in mainstream contemporary fiction, AIDS has been
dealt with fairly extensively. Since my contemporary reading is
more in science fiction, the examples I have seen are somewhat
non-standard, and usually involve a plague which has some
similarity to AIDS. But Hoban has done the reverse. Instead of
looking at AIDS through the mirror of another disease, Hoban looks
at death through the mirror of AIDS. Fitch feels that as long as
he doesn't have HIV he's safe. We all do this. If we don't have
AIDS (or don't smoke, or in general don't belong to that other
group over there), we're safe. Death happens to other people.
So here we have Jonathan Fitch, dealing with his two deaths, the
one theoretical but known, the other definite but unknown. And his
reactions help us examine our own attitudes toward death.
And what of the mysterious Mr Rinyo-Clacton and his gentleman's
gentleman whom Fitch describes as having "hands that looked capable
of crushing a skull like a walnut. He was also in formal attire
and almost invisible in his attendance. Except for the hands. I
thought his name might be Igor but it was Desmond." What is his
purpose in this contract?
Note to fellow Yanks: There is no period in the title, the American
title of THE HOUNDS OF ZAROFF is THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME, and
http://www.bookpages.com is my favorite British Web bookseller.
And in passing I'll note that this is at least the second book in
which Hoban quotes Rilke's line, "For Beauty is nothing but the
beginning of terror..." ("Denn das Schoene ist niches als des
Schrecklichen Anfang..."). [-ecl]
===================================================================
5. DANGEROUS BEAUTY (a film review by Mark R. Leeper):
Capsule: The rewards and hazards of being a
courtesan in late 16th century Venice are the
subject of this not-particularly-original
morality play. Catherine McCormack is charming
as the reluctant courtesan who learns to master
and embrace her work. The story is not very
ambitious but is compelling and the view of
Renaissance Venice is worth the price of
admission. Rating: 7 (0 to 10), low +2 (-4 to
+4)
It is 1583 in Venice. Society has proscribed a place for its
women. The vast majority are to remain the uneducated maintainers
of households for their husbands. It is not the most exciting of
lives, but if a woman is sufficiently charming her family may
arrange a marriage to someone prominent. This will get the woman
and perhaps her entire family good social connections. And at
least the married woman may hope to live in moderate comfort. In
most arranged marriages love is not given strong consideration in
the choice of a husband. Families essentially sell off their
daughters for material gain.
On the other hand a few of the most beautiful women can become
courtesans--mistresses or prostitutes of the wealthy and powerful.
Veronica Franco (played by Catherine McCormack) is in love with
handsome Marco Venier (Rufus Sewell). But he is from a wealthy
family and her father had died leaving the family with a pile of
debts and a desperate need of money. As Veronica's mother
(Jacqueline Bisset) tells her she must give up the idea of
marriage. Besides "marriage is a bargain, not a perpetual tryst."
And it is not profitable enough to support the Franco family.
Veronica must make the sacrifice of becoming a courtesan as, she is
informed, her mother did years ago.
The plot follows a very predictable trajectory from here. Veronica
does not want to become a prostitute, but agrees when she discovers
that being a courtesan has its advantages. It really is the only
way that a woman in Venetian society can escape the heavy
restrictions placed on women. A good courtesan is allowed to
become educated and, in fact, learning becomes a necessity.
Trained by her mother, Veronica learns the skills necessary for the
new profession and makes herself the most desirable courtesan in
Venice as well as a quick wit with verse. We follow her career
from being too poor to have a normal life to having one of the most
powerful names in Venice. But the fantasy world she comes to know
will change abruptly when it collides with the real world of the
Plague and of the Inquisition.
DANGEROUS BEAUTY was written by Jeannine Dominy based on the book
THE HONEST COURTESAN by Margaret Rosenthal. The plot is
predictable and even familiar, somewhere between myth and soap
opera. This does not ruin the story but a less obvious story could
have improved the film considerably. As interesting as the
foreground plot is the view of life in Renaissance Venice in the
background is really what rivets out attention. The visual effects
are far from perfect, but occasionally they do create a stunning
image, particularly the recreation of nautical scenes.
McCormack previously played Mel Gibson's love interest in
BRAVEHEART. In this film she get chances to display her wit, her
skill with a sword, and her body, one more enjoyable to see than
the other. Rufus Sewell of COLD COMFORT FARM and the current DARK
CITY plays Marco her lover. There seems to be between Sewell and
McCormack genuine chemistry, a thing too frequently missing from
screen love stories. DANGEROUS BEAUTY is populated with actors who
would not seem typical for a historical film. Fred Ward seems an
odd choice to be playing as a member of the Venier family, but is
reasonable if cast against type. Oliver Platt of FLATLINERS as a
competing wit also seems as out of place in a costume drama thought
he did play in THE THREE MUSKETEERS.
If DANGEROUS BEAUTY has a rather obvious plot and takes the safe
course of exploiting a feminist theme, but the production is well-
mounted, well-acted, and pretty to look at. I give it a 7 on the 0
to 10 scale and a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale. [-mrl]
===================================================================
6. SPHERE (a film review by Mark R. Leeper):
[This is being re-run from last week's issue, due to corruption
problems with it there.]
Capsule: SPHERE starts out exciting, turns into
an intriguing puzzle, then degrades to a
haunted house horror film, and finally it is
all pulled together with an overly-familiar
idea. SPHERE is faithful to a fairly mediocre
novel that fails to grab the viewer. It is
over-powered with a more distinguished cast
than it really needs, but somehow the actors
never bring the story to life. Rating: 4 (0 to
10), 0 (-4 to +4)
New York Critics: (2 positive, 12 negative, 2
mixed)
Michael Crichton has had a long career of writing novels, many of
which are science fiction. The most profitable film adaptation of
any novel was an adaptation of a Michael Crichton science fiction
novel. So in the logic of the film industry a good way to make a
profitable film would be to make a big-budget adaptation of another
Crichton science fiction novel. CONGO failed, and I am afraid that
SPHERE is probably not going to fare a whole lot better. It a
little better than just okay novel and it makes a film that is not
even that good. The film is expensive, over one hundred million
dollars; is long, 133 minutes; has a terrific cast, including
Dustin Hoffman, Samuel L. Jackson, and Sharon Stone; but has little
that is really original and less that is exciting.
Several years ago Dr. Norman Goodman (played by Dustin Hoffman) was
asked to write up a set of procedures for the government to follow
if an alien entity was actually encountered. The plan he wrote was
only semi-serious, but did explicitly define a team of experts who
should investigate the alien. Now that team has been assembled by
a mysterious team leader named Barnes (Peter Coyote) to study a
spacecraft almost a half mile in length that apparently dropped
into the Pacific Ocean in the early 1700s. Suddenly Norman's less
than serious procedure has become an action plan for dealing with a
real alien spacecraft. Included in the team to investigate are
mathematician Harry Adams (Samuel L. Jackson), biologist Beth
Halperin (Sharon Stone), and astrophysicist Ted Fielding (Liev
Schreiber). Together they travel to the deep Pacific spaceship to
understand its secrets. One major secret is the meaning of the
huge sphere of gold-toned liquid metal at the heart of this
spaceship.
What is disappointing about this film is that it does not have
really effective performances. Director Barry Levinson is at his
best with good actors rather than good special effects. The
problem here is he is making a big-budget science fiction film. It
has some effects, but the most intriguing effect he shows only as
an outline on a radar screen. The technique is to suggest rather
than to show and let the actors and the viewer's imagination carry
the film as Robert Wise did with THE HAUNTING. That could be a
reasonable approach in a low-budget film. But that requires
creating much more atmosphere than Levinson can manage to muster.
It requires the actors to give really compelling performances and
simply put, they don't. Hoffman's acting seems muted. Jackson
seems to laid back. We do not feel for these characters and do not
get inside their heads. Levinson paid big bucks for his actors and
does not really get price performance. And why we have Queen
Latifah as a minor functionary on the expedition is anybody's
guess. A cast of unknowns could have delivered as much emotional
impact at a fraction of the price. Look how much more powerful a
film like ALIEN was with only moderate actors.
Most science fiction spectaculars these days have second-tier
actors and first-tier special effects. Levinson tries second-tier
effects, and first-tier actors, but never makes that exchange pay
off for the viewer. Perhaps sci-fi spectaculars are just not an
actor's medium. The result gets a 4 on the 0 to 10 scale and 0 on
the -4 to +4 scale. [-mrl]
Mark Leeper
MT 3E-433 732-957-5619
mleeper@lucent.com
Financial capacity and politial perscpicacity are
inversely correlated. Long-range salvation by men
of business has never been highly regarded if it
means disturbence of an orderly life and convenience
in the present. So inaction will be advocated in
the present even though it means deep trouble in the