@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @@@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @@@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
Club Notice - 1/12/01 -- Vol. 19, No. 28
Chair/Librarian: Mark Leeper, 732-817-5619, mleeper@avaya.com
Factotum: Evelyn Leeper, 732-332-6218, eleeper@lucent.com
Distinguished Heinlein Apologist: Rob Mitchell, robmitchell@avaya.com
HO Chair Emeritus: John Jetzt, jetzt@avaya.com
HO Librarian Emeritus: Nick Sauer, njs@lucent.com
Back issues at http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
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
201-447-3652 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. The Ten Best Films I Saw in 2000 (film comment by Mark R.
Leeper):
I am using different procedures for my top ten list this year.
Most years for my "Top Ten" list I just take the capsules and the
article is written already. This year maybe I am feeling more
gregarious, but I will want to give my opinions of these films as
they have stuck with me. These are my impressions of these films
at this moment.
I have couched my title to cover myself a little. Living as I do
in the wilds of New Jersey, I do not have easy access to a lot of
the films I would have liked to see. Rather than delaying this
article in the hopes that a few of the films that have premiered in
Los Angeles in December will trickle down to my neighborhood, I
will just go with what I have seen. Some I will admit, I did not
see in the wilds. Four of my top ten films I saw at this year's
Toronto International Film Festival. But I did have a chance to
see them later in New Jersey. Three films that have not come to
New Jersey yet have been disqualified. I list them at the end of
the article.
Any list of favorites is going to be very subjective. Usually when
I put a list together there are one or two films that will surprise
people that ANYBODY would put on a top ten list. This year is no
exception. What can I say? First, I have not seen all the great
films out there and my tastes are very subjective. I will tell you
why I liked what I liked and hope nobody thinks I have misled them.
When I make a list I also generally find a surprise for me. That
there would be two films in Chinese is at least a bit unusual. But
that I have a Hindi film made for Indian domestic release is for me
a real surprise. Most Indians who talk to me about film deprecate
Hindi films. There are however other Indians who get very angry if
they hear the same sentiment coming from a non-Indian. With the
exception of a few serious films for export, most Hindi films are
more interesting for their cultural differences than for the high
quality of their content. I found this film one of surprising
complexity and intelligence. But I am getting ahead of myself.
Ordered roughly best first:
THE CONTENDER -- I am told that the impact of this film is
considerably less for people who watch "The West Wing" and for
political conservatives. I really enjoyed the writing and the
story. This is a political thriller about a Vice Presidential
confirmation hearing. The viewer gets a believable behind-the-
scenes look at how the game of politics is played and how pressure
is put on people to do the wrong and to do the right thing. This
is a film about people with principles and about people who only
pretend to have principles. The film is also very timely having a
great deal to say about the Clinton administration. Rod Lurie, who
wrote and directed, has given me one of the most intelligent films
I have seen in years. And there is a standout performance by Joan
Allen.
TITUS -- I like Shakespeare. I have seen a lot of Shakespeare.
While the stories are different, the experience of seeing one is
usually much the same. That is why I liked Branagh's MUCH ADO
ABOUT NOTHING, and why I chose the 1995 RICHARD III as the best
film of its year. TITUS is a Shakespeare experience like none
other I have ever had. It is a brash and gruesome horror/revenge
tale with visual design by Julie Taymor, best known for the
Broadway staging of "The Lion King." For once just the Shakespeare
plot is a jaw-dropper and the staging shows you things that would
be impossible on the stage. The whole film is beautiful ugliness.
Anthony Hopkins and Jessica Lange make for very formidable
opponents.
SUNSHINE -- There is no proper medium for this story. The film was
three hours long and should have been five. That made is a little
superficial. But nobody wants to release a five-hour movie. This
is a film that covers 140 years of a Jewish family in Hungary with
Ralph Fiennes playing as three very distinct men: father, son, and
grandson. One generation faces the anti-Jewish bigotry of the
Hungarian aristocracy; the next faces the Nazis with their racial
laws; the third generation faces the Soviets and their hatred of
the Jews. In each generation of the family there are members who
want to assimilate and those who want to maintain their Jewishness.
William Hurt has a nice subdued role as a moderate Soviet.
THE EMPEROR AND THE ASSASSIN and CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON --
I left CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON thinking that it had bested
THE EMPEROR AND THE ASSASSIN. Certainly the two of them are the
most enjoyable Chinese films I ever remember seeing and I probably
would up my rating of the latter to match CROUCHING TIGER's +3.
But right at this moment I would give THE EMPEROR AND THE ASSASSIN
the edge. I am going to give it the edge because I really think
that it has the better story of the two. THE EMPEROR AND THE
ASSASSIN has genuine historical sweep and deals with real
historical figures. CROUCHING TIGER is a light, or perhaps at
times heavy, fantasy. Also I happen to be a fan of the laws of
physics and I do not like to see the heroes of a film breaking them
with the abandon. The dancing at the ends of wires which are then
removed by CGI is beautifully done, but I still prefer the
historical film with its feet on the ground. However, both are
very good.
GLADIATOR -- An English-language historical epic is GLADIATOR, a
fictional story of the conflict between the Roman Emperor Commodus
and Maximus the former general of his father's army in Germania,
through injustice turned into a gladiator. The visuals are very
nice in most cases though some of the computer effects mar the
realism. There are a number of heavy ironies in the script.
Commodus is a villain because he murdered the wife and son of
Maximus and took the throne that Marcus Aurelius wanted to give
Maximus. Yet Maximus killed in the hundreds or thousands at the
behest of the peace-loving Marcus Aurelius. Somehow Spartacus
seems the more worthy hero. Still, how often do we get a spectacle
film about Ancient Rome?
TITAN A.E. -- Okay, let's get it over with. I know I am one of the
few admirerers of this film. For years one of my axes to grind has
been that animation is a tremendous medium for science fiction and
science fantasy. But to save a little money we have been given a
lot of lousy, unimaginative animation and nobody has been really
serious about using the medium well. I had a great deal of hope
for Japanese Anime. Occasionally the Japanese do a reasonable job
with a story, but mostly they do stories that allow them to
showcase fights and explosions, guns and fights. TITAN A.E. has
some fights, but they are not really what the film is all about.
It is not great science fiction, but it is on the level of Alan
Dean Foster. That's fine by me. And the film has some really
imaginative spacescapes. This is a film that has been needed for a
long time. I am just sorry that it did not get much attention and
that most the attention it did get was negative.
SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE -- This is a one-joke comedy-horror film, but
it is a great pleasure to watch, especially the first half. As
most people know, the first film version of Bram Stoker's DRACULA
was F. W. Murnau's 1922 film NOSFERATU featuring a really weird
performance by Max Schreck as Count Orlock the vampire. This film
suggests that the actor Schreck might actually have been a vampire
slowly dining at the expense of the film crew while NOSFERATU is
shot. In about fifty different ways this contradicts known film
history, but it is a nice lavish recreation of the period. I would
say that the first third is great, the middle third very good, and
the last reel is just okay. But it is certainly worth seeing.
HEY! RAM -- In the days after the British leave India in spite of
Mahatma Gandhi's policy of non-violence, India seems to be breaking
apart in the chaos that followed India's independence. When
rioting Muslims rape and kill his wife, Saketh Ram blames and is
determined to kill Mahatma Gandhi. There is nothing left in the
heart of the formerly peaceful man but hatred and a need for
vengeance. We follow Ram through his training by a covert group
intending to use his anger to change the course of Indian history
and politics. Some really engaging surreal sequences are extremely
effective.
O BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU? -- This year's Coen Brothers film is a
picaresque of three convicts escaped from a chain gang and trying
to find a treasure before a dam inundates it. The setting is 1937
Mississippi and the period feel is just about everything in this
film. As a whole it is not that great a story, but the individual
episodes are a lot of fun and the script comments on everything
Southern from politics to music to cooking. George Clooney and
John Turturro star with several Coen Brother films veterans
including Holly Hunter, John Goodman and Charles Durning. While it
seems to have little to do with the Preston-Sturges-inspired title,
it does humorously adapt sequences from Homer's ODYSSEY.
I saw the following at the Toronto International Film Festival and
they would have made this list if released here: SHADOW MAGIC,
LIAM, and THE DISH. SHADOW MAGIC and THE DISH will probably have
2001 releases in the United States. [-mrl]
===================================================================
2. TRAFFIC (a film review by Mark R. Leeper):
Capsule: This film is lot like SHORT CUTS, but
the individual stories woven together have a
common thread. Each thread involves the
illegal traffic in drugs coming from Mexico
into the United States. As such the film is
something of an education about the War on
Drugs. TRAFFIC has the sort of all-star cast
an occasional film can get when the statement
the film is making is to the actors more
important than the salary they will be paid.
Rating: 8 (0 to 10), high +2 (-4 to +4)
In TRAFFIC the audience is given three story lines. In Mexico a
local policeman (Benicio Del Toro) finds himself caught between two
drug families and at the same time between the United States and
Mexico. In San Diego a woman (Catherine Zeta-Jones) discovers that
her arrested husband whom she thought to be a successful
businessman is really more a successful drug runner. His job is
now affecting his family. In Ohio, a newly appointed government
drug czar finds his own family more heavily involved with the drug
traffic than he could have imagined. TRAFFIC uses the style of
storytelling now familiar from films like SHORT CUTS and MAGNOLIA.
The three stories involving drug traffic from Mexico to the United
States give the viewer a holographic view of many aspects of the
problem and why the two countries are losing the war. This is one
of the best possible uses of cinema, educating while it entertains.
The story in Mexico seems to have a distinctly different style from
the rest of the film. Visually California and Ohio scenes are
filmed with somewhat subtly different hues, and both are filmed in
softer colors. Ohio is filmed in blues and California in earth
tones. The scenes in Mexico, on the other hand, are filmed in
harsh reds and yellows in what looks like a cruder and grainer film
stock. This gives the impression of heat and tackiness, perhaps
something of a cheap shot. On the other hand the subtitles
somewhat tone down the story. There are a lot of "chinga"s in the
dialog that go un-translated in the subtitles. A few make it
through, but roughness of the language does not entirely make it to
the subtitles. In addition, the story in Mexico seems a different
breed from the other two, with more complexity making it a little
harder to follow. It also has some torture scenes that the viewer
should be prepared for.
TRAFFIC has the kind of cast that speaks of major actors willing to
work for less to be in a project that inspires them. Certainly
with the toll that drugs have taken on the film industry it is
quite possible. The cast includes Michael Douglas, Don Cheadle,
Benicio Del Toro, Luis Guzman, Dennis Quaid, Catherine Zeta-Jones,
Steven Bauer, Miguel Ferrer, Amy Irving and Peter Riegart. Several
of these people are in roles somewhat below their stature.
TRAFFIC is a powerful film that suggests our illegal drug problem
results from our own demand for and tolerance of drug usage.
Americans use illegal drugs like cocaine and, as the film implies,
abuse drugs that are legal like alcohol and nicotine. The
government has few new ideas left for fighting the problem and too
often its blundering does more harm than good.
Where TRAFFIC does a good job is not in leaving the viewer with a
deep understanding of the drug problem but more with a panoramic
view showing the path from supply to demand. And it is that
continuity from supplier to user that causes the value of the film
to rise above that of the sum of its parts. I rate TRAFFIC an 8 on
the 0 to 10 scale and a high +2 on the -4 to +4 scale. [-mrl]
Mark Leeper
HO 1K-644 732-817-5619
mleeper@avaya.com
America: The only country in the world where failing to
promote yourself is regarded as being arrogant. -- Garry Trudeau