THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
10/26/01 -- Vol. 20, No. 17
Big Cheese: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Little Cheese: Evelyn Leeper, evelyn.leeper@excite.com
Back issues at http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe, send mail to mtvoid-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe, send mail to mtvoid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Topics:
Quotes from Toronto (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Series SF (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
FROM HELL (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
Asian War Epics from the Toronto International Film
Festival (film reviews of ASOKA, BANG RAJAN:
THE VILLAGE WARRIORS, and MUSA--THE WARRIOR by
Mark R. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Quotes from Toronto (comments by Mark R. Leeper):
A special feature from the Toronto International Film Festival
this issue. These are actual lines overheard from other people
waiting for films.
"When I eat at McDonalds I get the shakes."
and
"You make fun of a guy's nipple ring, all of a sudden you aren't
invited to the wedding."
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Series SF (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
We recently were in the little town of Bucksport, Maine and having
a little time to kill we dropped into the bookstore on their main
street. In the science fiction section we should have known what
to expect, but were still a little disappointed. Everything we
saw was part of a series or a spin-off of a movie or something of
the sort. Now this is really a little odd. If you look at the
mainstream section there are almost no series. The state of
general fiction is like the state of science fiction in the
Sixties. I hasten to add this is a good thing. In mainstream
fiction authors have an idea and write a novel. There are very
few series. If the novel is popular, they may write another novel
but it usually will not have the same characters or premise. And
the novels are frequently about 350 pages. In science fiction we
get too much of the same thing over and over. We get Star Trek
book after Star Trek book after Star Trek book. If that is not
too much of the same thing we also get newer wider books, books
two inches thick from authors like Robert Jordan. Good writers
are succinct, but modern science fiction and fantasy writers are
paid by the length and you can tell. It is not that the other
sorts of books are not available. They are. But you have to go
to the bigger bookstores to find them. Even there the better
stuff is being choked out by Star Wars novels and the Terry
Pratchett stories.
The common wisdom of science fiction fans is that this sorry state
is the fault of publishers who only want to publish safe bet
novels. Science fiction conventions love to have panels talking
about what is going wrong. Of the triad of writers, publishers,
and readers, publishers are the least well represented at the
conventions so usually publishers get the blame at these panels.
I am sure that when writers and publishers get together in
conference, it is the readers who become the villains.
My (rhetorical) question today is why is the same problem not
happening with mainstream fiction? I think I have an answer.
What is happening may be the result of literary movements in
science fiction. In the 40s more than the 50s, and the 50s more
than the 60s, and the 60s more than the 70s, science fiction was a
fun genre. It was a literature of ideas. The free play of
concepts was the attraction of most science fiction. Starting
about 1970 or so science fiction writers got a lot more into
literary style. Thomas Disch coined the phrase "the tyranny of
ideas." He asked, "Why do science fiction writers feel they have
to write about ideas?" My answer, then as now, was that they
don't. They can write about kidney disease if they like, but who
is going to want to read it? Many writers, especially those under
the narcissistic banner of "the new wave" borrowed, I believe,
from French cinema, decided they should be writing books that were
literary experiments. Science fiction novels should be elevating.
Suddenly it was quite possible for a teenage fan to buy a science
fiction novel and to just not be able to understand what it was
all about. Reading science fiction frequently became like an
exercise from English class. To a number of fans this was good
news. They wanted their books to be more challenging to read.
Unfortunately this sort of reader was really in a small minority.
A large proportion of the readers want to buy novels that will
play with their imagination about the universe, not about literary
style. These were book by writers like Van Vogt, Simak, Asimov,
Wyndham, Del Rey, de Camp, Clarke, and perhaps above all Heinlein.
While some writers were becoming more literary, others decided
they wanted to use science fiction as a social force. Novels came
along with strong social messages. These messages were all very
good ones (well, usually) but they were as much fun as sitting in
church and listening to sermons. A lot of the youth audience was
lost. Science fiction in the 1970s and 1980s was a lot more
serious and literary than science fiction in the 1940s and 1950s,
but it was not nearly as much fun. In the later years it was
harder to pick up a science fiction novel at random and know it
would be a pleasurable experience.
The publishers took a look at McDonalds and the money they were
making by turning out a dependable product time after time after
time. Every time you buy a McDonalds hamburger it will be an
enjoyable experience a lot like the last time you bought a
McDonalds hamburger. It will not be a great experience, but you
know ahead of time what you are getting. If you buy a Star Trek
novel you know you will understand the universe in which the story
is set. You know the writing will be in plain prose. Publishers
have found that if they want to sell books they have to guarantee
that the reader will understand what is going on the book. They
have to link into previous reasonably happy science fiction
experiences.
What we are really seeing is something of a polarization of
science fiction. Where most of what was being written was kinda
fun and kinda good, now you have a lot of obviously edifying but
not so much fun authors (in my opinion) like Gene Wolfe, Samuel
Delaney, John Crowley, David Zindell. But where the real money
is, the teenage reader, the books are obviously in clearly
recognizable packages. At twnety feet you can probably recognize
a Terry Pratchett book, a Star Trek book, and a Star Wars book.
You can recognize a Robert Jordan book just from its heft. These
are what sell the best, and these are what you find in bookstores
like the one in Bucksport, Maine. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: FROM HELL (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: The Jack the Ripper story is back in the public eye with
a new film directed by the Hughes Brothers. The story is
stylishly told and the telling is fairly accurate except for the
needless adding of supernatural elements. In spite of being based
on a graphic novel, the film is nearly a remake of 1979's MURDER BY
DECREE. Rating: 7 (0 to 10), +2 (-4 to +4)
Most people know the name Jack the Ripper, the killer who murdered
five prostitutes in London's East End in 1888. It is a little
hard to account for what made Jack the Ripper the most famous
serial killer of his type of all time. Certainly his nickname
helped to capture the public's imagination. The area of London's
East End also adds some romance to the story, though as this new
version of the story points out, the East End was more squalid
than romantic in 1888. Also it happened in England. Somehow,
perhaps because of the presence of the media, what happens in
Britain or the US becomes much more of a world event than what
happens in, say, the Botswana or Indonesia. In any event the Jack
the Ripper case has become mythic around the world. The Ripper
murders have been the subject of several films. As retellings of
the events of the case go, FROM HELL is one of the more accurate.
The most obvious deviation from facts of the case history is to
take one of the major figures in the investigation, Inspector
Frederick George Abberline and cross him with Sax Rohmer's "Dream
Detective." Under the influence of opium he receives psychic
messages in the form of images relevant to the crime. The real
Abberline would probably not have been amused.
London's East End in 1888 already seems like a corner of hell for
the prostitutes like Mary Kelly (played by Heather Graham) who ply
their sad trade in the streets and alleys. There is hardly enough
profit in their work to feed themselves. Making matters worse
gangs of thugs shake them down for the little money they do make
on threat of being cut with sharp knives. And now someone else
really is carving up prostitutes in a series of killings the
papers call "the Ripper murders." Inspector Frederick George
Abberline (Johnny Depp) is investigating the crimes but does not
inspire much confidence in the likes of Mary Kelly. And the fact
he gets most of his best clues from opium dreams and absinthe
laced with laudanum does not inspire his superiors either.
Abberline investigates with the help of Police Sergeant Peter
Godley (Robbie Coltrane) whose combination of disdain for his
habits and concern for Abberline is one of the best things about
FROM HELL.
In this very dark view of late 19th century London Jack the
Ripper's cruelty would almost be a redundancy, but he rises above
it as the most vicious force of all. Certainly London is a most
threatening landscape. It seems to be composed of victims and
predators, the latter mostly all with sharp knives. We even have
contemporary John Merrick, the famous Elephant Man, thrown into
the story.
The production is film on a very large set that apparently was
built in the Czech Republic. Peter Deming, who also filmed EVIL
DEAD II and recently MULHOLLAND DRIVE, kept the scenery and
photography dark to match the tone. The film intentionally dwells
on unpleasant images and increasingly more gore. The disagreeable
images however do not extend to the female lead who seems
unrealistically intact considering the lifestyle she has led as an
East End prostitute. That makes her the one actor who is
incongruous in a role and it probably because the female lead had
to be made appealing to the audience. She is almost as out of
place as the horrible song over the end credits. The latter is
jarringly badly chosen.
Part of where this version falls down is in its presentation of
the Ripper Case as a puzzle. I am told that in the graphic novel
by Alan Moore and Eddie Campbell on which the film is based that
the reader knows from the start who the killer really is. The
Hughes brothers (MENACE II SOCIETY) have not taken that approach
but intended to leave it as a mystery until the last part of the
film. This was not very well done and the real killer is not well
concealed. Speaking for myself from the moment of presenting the
character who would who would in fact be the Ripper, that was who
I fully expected it would be. Terry Hayes and Rafael Yglesias's
script while good and professional in some other ways is
amateurish at making the story a real puzzle.
Another problem is that there is too much that is familiar in FROM
HELL, even given that it is based on a real case. This story is
made of factual and fictional elements. Not only almost all of
the factual but also many of the fictional elements seem present
in a previous film MURDER BY DECREE, which pitted Sherlock Holmes
against Jack the Ripper. In that film Holmes used the help of a
psychic who sees the murders in his dreams much as Abberline does.
Many of the same clues are mentioned in each film. Many of the
same clues go unmentioned in each film. It is almost certainly
true that MURDER BY DECREE was much of the inspiration for the
graphic novel on which FROM HELL was based.
FROM HELL is effective as a macabre history, as a horror story,
and a little less so as a mystery. It dependence on the
supernatural, however, unnecessarily spoils the credibility of
carefully achieved accuracy. I rate it an 7 on the 0 to 10 scale
and a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Asian War Epics From The Toronto International Film
Festival (film comments by Mark R. Leeper)
I have to admit having a special fondness for historical action
and adventure films. Second only to films of the fantastic, are
films of historical periods and armies facing each other. I guess
I probably like them both for some of the same reasons, the escape
into a world of action and adventure. But be it LAWRENCE OF
ARABIA, THE WAR LORD, GETTYSBURG, CAPTAIN HORATIO HORNBLOWER, or
whatever, there is something fascinating about seeing other people
fight. And since I was brought up on Western history, it is of
particular interest to see war films from Asia so that there is
the novelty of seeing a different culture at war. This year's
TIFF offered three epics: ASOKA from India, BANG RAJAN: THE LEGEND
OF THE VILLAGE WARRIORS from Thailand, and MUSA--THE WARRIOR from
South Korea.
ASOKA
CAPSULE: Fanciful retelling of the story of Asoka, the Emperor who
conquered India and then spread Buddhism. This film has unusually
rich production values for a Hindi film and tells his life as a
love story between two young people. The real content of the film
is the fictionalized romance and any historical detail is little
more than a plot complication. Rating: 7 (0 to 10), +2 (-4 to +4)
Who was Asoka? Americans may be vaguely aware that the name Asoka
(or Ashoka) is venerated by Indians. (In the US it seems to be a
common name for Indian restaurants.) Asoka is for India
approximately what King Arthur was for Britain. He was the third
emperor in the Maurya (Peacock) Dynasty. His grandfather,
Chandragupta Maurya, was the first great conqueror in the
subcontinent since Alexander the great and unified much of the
area we now think of as Northern India. He left his son Bindusara
to rule after him. When Bindusara, in turn, was dying his son
Asoka murdered all rival princes but Asoka's brother. This bit of
barbarity did not sit well with the people and it was four years
before Asoka was allowed to ascend the throne and become King of
Magadha. After eight years of rule, he began his campaign of
extending his empire by warring on the neighboring kingdom of
Kalinga.
Asoka nearly finished the job of conquest of by spreading his
empire to all of the subcontinent, as well as parts of
Afghanistan, the Himalayas, Nepal, Kashmir, and the Swat Valley.
But to hold power he had to change his image. Once he had
conquered he won support by cultivating a character of
righteousness and promulgating Buddhism, though little is known if
he himself actually even adopted the religion. However, while he
formerly was known as Asoka the Fierce (Chandashoka) he now became
Asoka the Righteous (Dharmashoka). He tried to be a ruler that
the people would want, working for civil improvement. Asoka set
up systems of communication, provided trees along roads to comfort
travelers. He provided medical facilities for men and animals,
and championed religious tolerance. His edicts, carved in stone
throughout the empire, became the most lasting reminder of his
reign. In fact though he ruled roughly from 272 to 242 B.C., his
legend was not written until the second century A.D. The Greek
historians never mention him and even the Brahman's do not mention
him, but he is a Buddhist legend. It has been pointed out that
more people remember his name than those of Caesar or Charlemagne.
Sadly, much of this is incidental to the film. The telling of the
story of Asoka is as fanciful and has as little relation to real
history as the film CAMELOT. Instead, the film ASOKA becomes in
large part a (temporarily) tragic love story. The film begins
with Asoka (Shah Rukh Khan), a young prince, being given a sword
that is as much a demon as it is a sword. He is told he will be
great and goes to claim that heritage. He finds it is all too
easy to use his sword in palace intrigues. As a result he chooses
for himself a sort of voluntary exile and what Australians would
call a walkabout.
While on his sojourn he happens to see and instantly fall in love
with a dancing princess. She is Kaurwaki (Kareena Kapoor). He
also makes friends with a Buddhist holy man who plants the seeds
of Asoka's later historic transformation to Buddhism. As he
travels we see his tempestuous nature that will lead him to become
the fierce conqueror. Both transformations wait until late into
the 150-minute film.
Santosh Sivan who directs and co-wrote the film gives the film a
very nicely polished or frequently even a lush sumptuous look.
Until recently Asian films have not seemed to go in a big way for
spectacular large-scale battle scenes. Now Chinese and Indian
filmmakers are recognizing that they can stage historical
spectacle more economically than their Hollywood counterparts.
Sivan takes a while but does give us some big battle scenes. The
film opens more with a flare of fantasy in a style reminiscent
perhaps of a Sinbad film. The music is by Anu Malik, whose songs
do not really help the period feel, but are quite pleasant. I
rate ASOKA a 7 on the 0 to 10 scale and a +2 on the -4 to +4
scale.
Americans without much experience with Indian films should expect
some stylistic differences. Acting is occasionally overdone by
American standards. That is just the art form. Music is a very
integral part of Indian films, much more than American films. A
friend liked the film but expressed some frustration that the
action would stop inappropriately for what appeared to be embedded
music videos, sometimes with music and dancing that seemed very
wrong for the period. This too is really part of the art form.
Think of it as seasoning added to the meat of the story. In fact
as a nice souvenir the songs of almost any major film are
available in Indian music stores and even groceries on audio
cassettes for only two or three dollars. It is a real bargain.
Much of the music easily becomes very likable.
BANG RAJAN: THE LEGEND OF THE VILLAGE WARRIORS
CAPSULE: This is a Thai film commemorating a heroic village who
resisted the Burmese armies invading Siam in 1765. The style of
the film is crude but promising. As international historical
films go, this seems like a low-budget epic that somehow does not
grab the imagination quite like a Kurosawa might, but still has
well-executed moments. Rating: 6 (0 to 10), +1 (-4 to +4)
In the mid-18th century certain provinces of Burma resisted the
central government. These provinces needed outside support and
got much of their support from the neighboring country of Siam
(now Thailand). When a new ruler of Burma came to power his first
priority was to subdue rebellious provinces and his second was to
punish Siam for supporting the revolt. In 1765 he sent two armies
into Siam to capture the capital, Ayudhaya. The two armies were
intended to converge on the capital, but only one arrived. One
army was held up by the resistance of a single tenacious Siamese
village, Bang Rajan. This village has become legendary in
Thailand as sort of a Siamese Alamo. This film is the story of
the Bang Rajan resistance.
In the film the village knows the Burmese are approaching and
chooses Taen as their leader against the Burmese. The village
also asks Chan, a non-villager, to help. Chan is a cagey veteran
fighter who lives in the local woods. Chan's strength of spirit
and his resolve seems to be symbolized by an unusual huge mustache
that looks like the horns of a water buffalo. Chan brings with
him to the fight a group of fighters and trains the village how to
fight. The village asks Ayudhaya for assistance to fight off the
enemy in the form of cannons, but Ayudhaya offers no help so the
villagers have to forge their own weapons. Meanwhile the village
grows as neighbors join Bang Rajan for protection and to fight.
But will they be able to overcome the formidable Burmese forces?
This is a historical war film but it is very differently in style
from a RAN or KAGEMUSHA. Akira Kurosawa, in his films, makes the
most of military regalia, armor, weapons, and local architecture.
Thanit Jitnukul, who directed BANG RAJAN, cannot make his films as
picturesque and hence cannot create the same sort of feel. His
heroes are simple villagers. Chan fights in open shirt and
loincloth. Typical weapons are arrows, axes, and machetes. The
battle strategy is something like "each man must run at the enemy
and kill as many as possible." Somehow it is harder to make these
crude forest battles look as impressive as Japanese or Korean Clan
Wars or horseback battles of kingdoms in India. Also the film
style is much cruder. At least twice in the fighting mud is
splashed on the camera lens. Most filmmakers would have edited
that part out. The music by Chatchai Pongprapaphan is, however,
powerful and exciting. The production cost $1.3M, which I am told
is the cost of four typical Thai films, but in Thailand it has
grossed the most of any domestic film ever. That is partially
fueled by current tensions on the Burma-Thailand border. In fact
this film is considered to be part of the provocation for those
tensions.
The story of Bang Rajan Village is known to every school child in
Thailand. Tanit Jitnukul directs and co-authors this new film,
bringing the story to an international audience. I rate it a 6 on
the 0 to 10 scale and a +1 on the -4 to +4 scale.
MUSA--THE WARRIOR
CAPSULE: In 1375 a delegation of Korean diplomats traveling in
China are caught between the warring Mings and Yuans and have to
fight their way to safety in this Anabasis-like tale. Along the
way they pick up and must defend a Chinese princess. A lot of
action but not a strong plot. Rating: 6 (0 to 10), high +1 (-4 to
+4)
Following the success of CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON, more
attention is being given to Asian historical epics, particularly
those with a lot of fighting. This has been a niche market since
Akira Kurosawa's YOJIMBO and SANJURO, but it is as respectable and
popular today as it has ever been. South Korea is attempting to
get into that market with a respectable historical action film,
MUSA--THE WARRIOR.
In 1375 the Yuan Dynasty of China has recently fallen. The Ming
have taken their place. But in the out-lands the Ming and Yuan
still battle each other. The envoy of the Ming to Korea was
murdered prior to the events of this story and Korean delegation
has been sent to China in an effort to mollify the Mings. That
delegation disappeared from history. MUSA--THE WARRIOR is a
fictional story of what may have happened to that mission.
In the film the group is let into a trap by the Mings. They are
disarmed and accused of treachery against the ruling Mings. Their
punishment is to be abandoned in the middle of a remote desert
ruled by Yuan troops and left for dead. The Koreans decide they
have to fight their way back to Korea. As the Korean diplomats
are killed in battle or by the trek, a determined leader, Choi
Jung, decides that the men must be pushed, but he will get them
back to Korea. Without mercy he drives the remaining men through
the desert on their way toward Korea and safety. Among the
Koreans is the dying Lee Jee-Hun. He frees his powerful slave
Yoh-Sol, but the other Koreans still treat him and consider him as
a slave in spite of his prowess as a fighter. The adventures they
have along the way are very typical for this sort of film. A
troop of Yuans have captured the beautiful Ming princess PuYong.
Yoh-Sol, a master of the spear, rescues the princess and in so
doing makes an enemy of the Yuans. (Do princesses in carts ever
get where they were intended to go?) The story follows the
attempts of the Koreans to make their way back home surrounded by
enemies.
The martial arts here seem relatively untainted by fakery. There
is no wirework. For some reason, the director (Kim Sung-su who
also wrote the screenplay) shows many of the fight scenes at eight
or perhaps twelve frames per second. Why this convention is
becoming popular, I am not sure. I first noticed it in GLADIATOR
but it seems more distraction than anything else. There seem to
be many battles and repeated scenes of people getting arrows
through the head or neck. At 154 minutes, this is a longish film.
I rate the film a 6 on the 0 to 10 scale and a high +1 on the -4
to +4 scale. My interpretation of the title was that Musa would be
some character's name. However, there is no character named Musa
anywhere in the film. I now suspect that Musa may be Korean for
"warrior." [-mrl]
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Democracy is a process by which the people are free
to choose the man who will get the blame.
-- Laurence J. Peter
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help?
Donate cash, emergency relief information
http://us.click.yahoo.com/d49MCB/3WDDAA/ySSFAA/J.MolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mtvoid-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/