THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
11/21/03 -- Vol. 22, No. 21
El Presidente: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
The Power Behind El Pres: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
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:
A Thought for This Thanksgiving (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
THE HIGH AND THE MIGHTY (film comments by Mark R. Leeper)
MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD (film
review by Mark R. Leeper)
MARGARETTE'S FEAST (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
SO FAR AWAY (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
This Week's Reading (SO MANY BOOKS, SO LITTLE TIME;
SHAKESPEARE IS HARD, BUT SO IS LIFE; HOW TO READ
LITERATURE LIKE A PROFESSOR) (book comments by
Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: A Thought for This Thanksgiving (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
When the world seems to be in a moment of crisis we should be
thankful that it is only a small minority of people causing the
problems. The vast majority of people in the world are good at
heart and just want peace and happiness for the world. We good
people really have much greater numbers and can be a Force for
World Peace. We need to band together, confront the troublemakers,
and really beat the crap out of them. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: THE HIGH AND THE MIGHTY (film comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Most of John Wayne's adventure films from the 1950s and 1960s have
become classics and are frequently revived on video and on cable
stations like Turner Classic Movies. His Westerns have dated very
little. Even bad films like THE CONQUEROR have made it to video
and are available for people who really want them. There has been
one exception, one film that has been kept from the fans. It is
film that was highly regarded on its release but has never become
generally available. THE HIGH AND THE MIGHTY (1954) based on the
novel by Ernest K. Gann was really one of the seminal disaster
films. It set the mold for the AIRPORT series of films and later
for the AIRPLANE! satires. The film was important and it was a
critical success. So why has the film become so obscure?
Well, the rumor on the net is that it is really owned by Michael
Wayne, John's son who runs the Batjac Production Company. And
that he has several times announced that it would be released to
video, but the actual event has never happened for what are called
"technical reasons." I could be proved wrong very easily, but I
think there are other problems with releasing the film. I think
that while this was a really exciting film in the early Fifties,
much of the impact it had would be lost on a modern audience and
the film would be made laughable, in spite of its esteemed
reputation.
I actually have recently seen a copy of THE HIGH AND THE MIGHTY on
videotape, recorded from an early cable broadcast. I had not seen
it in years and inspired by a discussion with a reader I decided
to watch it again to see if it still had the impact it once had.
I find it hard to believe this film is the same one I saw years
ago and which had so impressed me. That I remember as being an
engrossing film of a flight from Honolulu to San Francisco that
may be doomed.
The problem is that where the film is good, it is very good, but
where it is bad it is laughably and even painfully dated. I
suspect that with the 1954 editing, the film would end up a
laughing stock. Part of that is that parts of the film were hokey
in a style that was acceptable in 1954, but which 49 years later
has not aged well. Each of the passengers comes to the ticket
counter and gives age and profession (did they really have to do
that in 1954 to get a plane ticket?), then the attendant tells the
woman at the counter the person's real background. He apparently
knows nearly every passenger on the plane at least by reputation.
Why? He has been a night clerk in a Nevada hotel. There is the
young newlywed couple with the wife terrified because the world is
so big and they are so young. We have a selfish and self-absorbed
theatrical producer. Then there is the lovable little Swedish
fisherman. Each person but the fisherman is profiled by the ex-
night-clerk. John Wayne is the co-pilot, flying since the early
days, but who made a flying mistake once that killed his wife and
son. Each has his own back-story and each will be redeemed by the
frightening events to come. Even if some of this seemed like good
cinema, in the post-AIRPLANE! era they will seem very dated. Some
of the constructs, like voiceovers to represent thought, really
date the film. It does not help that the actual pilot is Robert
Stack, who brings forth memories of the later satires.
This is not to say that there is not plenty to like about THE HIGH
AND THE MIGHTY. Dimitri Tiomkin wrote one of his better scores,
based around a sixteen-note theme that the Wayne character
repeatedly whistles. It won him an Oscar. William Wellman does a
good job of twisting the tension, particularly in the later parts
of the film. Of course the wizened old co-pilot has the
experience to take over and save the flight, though latter-day
audiences may ask if the decision he makes is not dangerously
irresponsible.
The major faults of this film are those of its main character.
Time has past this film by. It is still a solid piece of
entertainment for the right audience, but age has made more
obvious the artificial parts that were in the syntax of cinema
when the film was made. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD (film
review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: In 1805 Jack Aubrey, captain of HMS Surprise, is obsessed
by the mission to capture or sink the French ship Acheron. More
so than in any previous film we are brought aboard a fighting ship
from Britain's war against Napoleon. The story may be slow except
for some really exciting action scenes, but the historical detail
is probably the best for any film about the period. If you like
Aubrey (or even Hornblower) stories this film from director Peter
Weir is a must. Rating: 8 (0 to 10), high +2 (-4 to +4)
MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD is about life at
sea and it is about little else. When the film starts you are on
His Majesty's Ship Surprise, crew 197 men, and you will be there
for 138 minutes getting a fascinating education of what life was
like on a British fighting ship during the Napoleanic wars. There
are a number of good films about shipboard life in the British
Navy in the early 1800s. It seems to be a period that grabs the
imagination of writers and filmmakers. There is DAMN THE DEFIANT,
BILLY BUDD, and CAPTAIN HORATIO HORNBLOWER. But none of them is
as intensely a survey of shipboard life as is MASTER AND
COMMANDER. There is an overall plot of the Surprise's mission to
capture or sink the French privateer Acheron. Acheron is bigger,
faster, and has twice the number of guns of the Surprise. And the
viewer will be on the Surprise until that mission is accomplished.
The year is 1805 and Captain Jack Aubrey (played by Russell
Crowe), captain of the Frigate HMS Surprise is under orders to
chase the French privateer Acheron. Acheron is bigger, faster,
and has more than twice Surprise's guns. The Surprise is
overmatched, but Aubrey is a man committed to capturing his prey.
The chase is not like a Star Trek or even a Hornblower story.
When the Surprise is so badly outgunned, it loses battles. At one
point it is forced to flee from the enemy. The encounters with
the enemy are widely separated, but in between is a fascinating
education in what life is like on a ship of war in the early 19th
century. Aubry does not have Hornblower's 20th century values.
For example, when it seems an important object lesson, he has no
aversion to ordering a flogging. (This is something Hornblower
did only once, and then only because he was forced into it.) Yet
Aubry seems a reasonable man who maintains a good relation with
even the young midshipmen on his ship. On request over dinner he
will tell of what it was like serving with Admiral Nelson. He
even makes puns. But he does not allow the crew to question his
Ahab-like determination to hunt and if need be lose his ship and
crew stalking his powerful foe. The only man who can question him
at all is his best friend, ship's surgeon Stephen Maturin (Paul
Bettany).
The real star of the film is the HMS Surprise (played by the HMS
Rose floating in a tank at Baja, Mexico). As we see it is almost
a floating city. As Aubrey tells his crew, "This ship is our
home; this ship is England." We see a wide variety of aspects of
shipboard life: the maintaining of the ship, the preparing food,
the painfully primitive medical procedures, the battle station
responsibilities, the action in a storm, and the crew's crowded
life in the darkness below decks. The film is almost without
women except for one quick sequence when the ship stops for
supplies. We get to know the ship well. The enemy ship is
implacable and kept impersonal, seen only from a distance, for
most of the film. Curiously Crowe, who usually seems a bit rigid
in his roles, seems less stiff than naval commanders usually are
portrayed on film. Laughton as Bligh and Peck as Hornblower seem
to have backbones of steel rods. Crowe's body language is much
more flexible and informal. And while at times he is dedicated to
his duty, he seems a little too willing to reinterpret those
orders to help his friend. Much more than in other films we are
told the commander's philosophy of battle.
While many of the action scenes are enhanced greatly by CGI, great
care was taken to keep the digital effect undetectable. I am
usually bothered by digital effects and in this film I never
consciously noticed them in spite of their extensive use. The
battle scenes are realistic and exciting, but blood seems to be
kept to a minimum.
MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD is a big film. It
is produced by 20th Century Fox, Miramax, and Universal, and bears
all three banners. I rate it an 8 on the 0 to 10 scale and a high
+2 on the -4 to +4 scale. (Oh, that piece of classical music that
they use so liberally after battle scenes is Ralph Vaughan
Williams's "Fantasia on a Theme by Talis," long a favorite of
mine.) [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: MARGARETTE'S FEAST (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
Rating: low +2 (-4 to +4)
Renato Falcoa wrote and directs this low-budget, monochrome,
silent comedy from Brazil. It is strongly reminiscent of Charlie
Chaplin comedies like CITY LIGHT and MODERN TIMES. Our main
character is the head of one of two large families living in what
is little more than a shack but which is quickly transformed into
a makeshift theater or whatever else the families need. He and
the other breadwinner work in an auto factory, assembling cars by
hand. We watch them work, but they are called to a meeting where
they are told business is failing. Automation will do their jobs
more efficiently, and they are to be laid off. Our character is
afraid to tell his family but finds a badge that says sales
manager and wears it home. Ah, but fate has something good in
store. He wins the lottery and suddenly has a lot of money that
allows him to see much more of Brazil's society. The sketches
satirize crime, evangelists, fancy restaurants, and much more.
The themes of poverty, the social order, etc., are ones that
Chaplain would have found very familiar and would have been
sympathetic to the film's point of view. As in a Chaplin comedy
the music is well composed to fit the film, incorporating sound
effects where needed. Falcoa's music just has a slightly more
Brazilian sound. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: SO FAR AWAY (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
Rating: high +1 (-4 to +4)
This is a Spanish and Cuban comedy that is at times rollickingly
funny. Cuban director Juan Carlos Tabio is the co-director of
STRAWBERRY AND CHOCOLATE (1993) which got a wide release in the
United States and several other films not as well known. However,
there literally is not much I can say about the plot without
spoiling it. A plot twist somewhat into the movie seriously warps
what this film is really all about. My own rules about what I can
say about the plot of a film will not let me reveal what this
somewhat gimmicky film actually does. Non-negotiable. Sorry.
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
This previous Saturday I did one of my "library marathon
afternoons." Mark has a bi-monthly origami meeting at the
Monmouth County Library, and since we don't have borrowing
privileges at this library, I use the time as an opportunity to
read all the books I want to read that it has that our own library
doesn't have. (Well, maybe not all.)
I had hoped to get to Jane Jensen's DANTE'S EQUATION, but its
length was rather daunting for the four-hour block I had, so I
stuck to non-fiction instead. First was Sara Nelson's SO MANY
BOOKS, SO LITTLE TIME, which was the diary of her attempt to read
a book a week throughout 2002 and write about it. (I suppose what
I'm doing here is similar, though I'm reading more and writing
less.) Her attitudes and observations about reading in general
seemed more interesting than what she had to say about specific
books, probably because if one hasn't read the book, her comments
don't resonate. But, for example, she talks about "junk reading,"
saying, "Woody Allen once said that the advantage of bisexuality
is that it doubles your chances of finding a date on Saturday
night. Having a bifurcated reading brain--one part that likes
'junk' and one that reveres 'literature'--is the same kind of
satisfying. You don't have to be any one thing and you don't have
to think any one way. And should you happen upon different kinds
of people in different situations, your pool of conversation
topics is twice as deep." She also admits to the relief of
learning to be able to "give up" on a book if she's not enjoying
it. I didn't give up on this, but I will admit to merely skimming
the last quarter or so.
Fintan O'Toole's SHAKESPEARE IS HARD, BUT SO IS LIFE seems almost
designed as a rebuttal to Harold Bloom's SHAKESPEARE: INVENTING
THE HUMAN. O'Toole states this fairly early on, saying,
"Characterization in the modern theatrical sense is a word which
comes into use in the English language in the mid-nineteenth
century. Character, in the sense of a part assumed by an actor,
comes in a hundred years earlier, but still a very long time after
Shakespeare's death. In Shakespeare's time, the word that would
have been used in the place of our notion of 'characterization',
was 'personation'--the presentation of a person on stage, with
obvious overtones of deliberate pretence. To talk about
Shakespeare's characters in isolation from the action, to discuss
their psychology and motivation, is to treat Shakespearean
tragedies as if they were nineteenth-century naturalistic plays.
It is to miss their uniqueness and their power." Instead of
characterization, O'Toole sees Shakespeare's plays as being
primarily about the transitional state that Elizabethan/Jacobean
England was in, a transition between the old feudal order versus
the new capitalist one, which he simplifies as between status and
power. O'Toole looks specifically at HAMLET, KING LEAR, OTHELLO,
and MACBETH in this context, and the fact that Hamlet and and Lear
have status (based on their positions but no power), while Othello
and Macbeth have power based on their own actions, but no status.
One of the fascinating things about Shakespeare is just how many
interpretations one can find for his plays.
But if you want something simpler, try Thomas C. Foster's HOW TO
READ LITERATURE LIKE A PROFESSOR. This seems to be a very strange
entry in the self-help field. Basically, Foster gives you a
series of chapters with "rules" for interpreting literature. In
case you have difficulty in figuring out the rules from the
chapters and examples, Foster gives you the rules in bold-face
type. And what are the rules? Well, the first few include, "The
real reason for a quest is self-knowledge," "Whenever people eat
or drink together, it's communion," and "Ghosts and vampires are
never only about ghosts and vampires." The problem with all this
is that if you're someone who finds these "rules" new, it's
unlikely they're going to make a big difference in how you read.
Actually, it's unlikely in that case that you'd pick up this book
in the first place (although it may have the same intended market
as those "Bluffer's" books). Even I, who loves to see lists of
things, find this approach to literature a bit strained. But the
last rule is worth remembering: "Don't read with *your* eyes." By
this, Foster means that one must at least partially judge a book
by the standards of its intended audience--relatively easy for
this week's best-seller, not so easy for Homer's "Iliad". [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Reading made Don Quixote a gentleman, but
believing what he read made him mad.
-- George Bernard Shaw
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/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/