Author Archives: Bob Evans

Sunday Night: Movie The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra

Last night I was in the mood for something playful, genre, and most of all not infused with important themes. Scanning my library of DVD and Blu-ray I quickly settled on The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra.

Released in 2001 Lost Skeletonis a love letter and satire of the terrible B-movies dealing with aliens, monsters, and scientist from the late 50s through the mid 60s. Shot of video with the color removed and without complex camera tracking movements the film recreates the feel of those productions striving to capture material that lay beyond the filmmaker’s budget and abilities. The dialogue is comically stiff, the acting more wooden than a lumberyard, and the characters exist only in a continuum of stereotypes. All of this combines for a hilarious satire made with love from people who like myself wasted far too many late night hours devouring any sort of SF or horror film.

Dr. Paul Armstrong, a scientist, and his clichĂ©d wife Betty as come to a remote cabin searching for a fallen meteorite made of the rarest of radioactive elements, Atmospherium. Also in the dry parched mountains is Dr. Paul Fleming, an evil scientist who has come searching for the Lost Skeleton in hope of using its ill-defined abilities to become the most powerful man in the world, however to awaken the skeleton from its slumber he requires Atmospherium. Completing the triad of search characters are the space aliens Kro-Bar and his wife Lattice. Their ship was forced to land in these same mountains, their pet mutant has escaped, presenting a lethal danger to everyone on Earth, and the power source of the ship has been depleted. Of course their ship is powered by — you guessed it — Atmospherium. Rounding out the cast as secondary characters as Forest Range Brad, the Lost Skeletonhimself, the Mutant, and Animala played with seductive style wearing a body-suit, gloves, and slippers as an ‘animal’ costume. Hilarity ensures in a story that sets back male/female relations several decades. I think it is worth noting that this film fully passes the Internet’s famed Bechdel Test while never leaving the sexist tropes of the late 50s and early 60s.

I saw this movie in an art-house theater on its initial release and it was quite refreshing to find something this light, this fun, playing in the same venue where deep and serious foreign films often screened. The cast reunited for a sequel, naturally titled The Lost Skeleton Returns Again, and while the follow-up film plays well it is not quite as fresh as that first pure experience. For anyone who loved those bad, cheesy, Black and White genre movies this is something you should give a scan.

Share

We Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet

There are those who think the recent increase in firings and chaos at the White House is a symptom of Trump feeling the heat from Mueller’s investigations. This may be the case. It is true that Mueller has been working his way up the food chain apparently flipping people and finding things that had been hidden. His team is reported to be among the best in the business as unraveling complex white crime cases and it should not be forgotten that Mueller was the man who brought down the ‘Teflon Don,’ so the pressure on the Administration must be intense. Still, this is taking place in a fantastically favorable environment.

A major news organization is dedicated to defending the administration, many of the ‘Never Trumpers’ writers from before the election have now climbed aboard defending the administration, the President’s approval rating floor remains in the high 30’s to low 40 despite the speed and intensity of the chaos. And yet we are told that the man at the center of it rages at staff, lashes out on social media, and generally reacts as a person in a siege who has no hope of relief.

People, it may get a lot worse.

One aspect of the environment that I did not mention was a favorable congress. Both house are controlled by the President’s party and have run a successful campaign of interference on his behalf. With the coming elections later this year the Democratic Party may very well take control of the House and less likely but not as unlikely as historically viewed, they could even gain the Senate. (That is a very long shot and for the moment let’s assume the GOP retains the upper chamber.)

Not only would Trump lose the friendly interference from a GOP House, but the Democratic committees would undoubtedly launch intense investigation of their own, investigation backed by subpoena powers. Should the Muller investigation reveal unquestionable evidence of crimes by people close to Trump or Trump himself he will lose the support of the GOP elected members as they cut their losses to save themselves.

I think that 2019 is going to be a very dangerous year. It is the year we will see Trump faced with threats from all sides, court cases proceeding along that may force his depositions, and as it has throughout his life, all his money, all his bluster and all his bullying will not save him. Yet he will still retain command of the most powerful military on the planet, he will still have a Department of Justice that instructs it’s Federal Attorneys to seek the death penalty in drug cases whenever possible, and he will have proceeded along with the firing of ‘disloyal’ ‘deep state’ professionals.

We must go through this dangerous time.

Share

Speeding Along

It’s a little shocking to me just how quickly the revisions to my novel are proceeding. The first act has been corrected and locked, the second act has been turned over to my sweetie-wife for her excellent review and I started in on the third act this week.

Most people write in a three-act structure but lately I have been experimenting with a five-act format. I like how it breaks the story down into smaller elements and that the elements themselves have in general a better defined nature than establishment, conflict, resolution. So even after my third act is fixed that still leaves two more to complete.

I am also a bit surprised by how quickly the story is progressing. The nature of the plot and of the story, those are separate elements in my opinion, caused me a bit of a concern that it might begin rather slowly and beginnings are so terrible important. In fact when I wrote the first draft it originally had a prologue and it was the type that promised drama and action for later in the story but I have no awakened from my dread and I am cutting the prologue. It looks to me that the character and his troubles start at the opening scenes and the prologue was simply a mistake.

(Of course I still may be deluding myself, but that is what beta-readers are for.)

I have also received word that an editorial team at a comedic SF anthology likes my writing and have invited me to submit to their next anthology. That is very flattering and their submission window is still open. The question is can I compose something that is funny and within the tight but not impossible deadline? Comedy is very much outside of my skill set and my comfort zone and yet I am always advising fellow writers that they should attempt things outside of their comfort zone. I have a couple of ideas, but for me the forging of ideas into plot and story is the most challenging aspect of creation.

Share

Sunday Night Movie: The Last Starfighter

The mid 1980s, a period when Star Wars dominated studio thinking demanding escapist adventures, and every movie had to have a slew of pop songs imbedded in the soundtrack. Not at all bucking those themes The Last Starfighter did break startling new ground in the realm of visual effects. Utilizing the most advanced super-computers in the world, this movie presented the first feature film to present photo realistic, that phrase used generously, special effects for the big screen.
The story is simple; Alex Rogan is a teenager in a forgotten corner of California. He lives with him mothers and little brother in a tiny trailer park where Alex helps out with the repairs and maintenance while planning to go to college and have a life bigger then just being a super. The Starlight Star Bright trailer park is so devoid of excitement that the entire community turns out to witness Alex’s besting the arcade game Starfighter. Alex’s girlfriend Maggie is torn between hi dreams of a big life in the city, that nebulous unnamed metropolis presumably just over the parched mountains that surround the trailer park, and her fear of leaving home and the great unknown. Needless to say Alex somehow is pulled from the bland, boring existence and is drawn up into a galactic war with the fate of hundreds of worlds hanging on his particular gifts.
Even by the middle of the next decade the cutting edge SFX in The Last Starfighter were surpassed and not by the newest generation of super-computers but by banks of home computers. However one does not watch The Last Starfighter for its visual effects but rather for the charming, innocent, and a little naive story of Alex Rogan and his voyage into destiny. The cast had a number of 80’s up and comers, Lance Guest as Alex, Catherine Mary Stewart as Maggie, a blink and you’ll miss him appearance by Will Wheaton before not only Next Gen but before Stand by Me as well. In addition to the young cast member the films also boasted a pair of Hollywood veterans, Dan O’Hierlihy as Grig the gung-ho iguana and Robert Preston as Centauri an interstellar version of the same character he played in The Music Man.
The Last Starfighter never found the love that many genre films of the 80s acquired. The very dated special effect certainly hurt the film in terms of cable and broadcast airtime leaving this project as film with a small but devoted following. It would be interesting if instead of some studio launching a remake of the property if they simply replaced all the VFX with start of the art CGI and left the rest of the film untouched. IF they do such a thing or not The Last Starfighter remains a movie that I can always turn to in order to raise lowered spirits.

Share

Not a post

My schedule is scrambled so instead of my prattling enjoy to tremendously  talents Melody Gardot

 

youtube placeholder image
 

Share

No Honest Critique…

… Can be wrong.

This is something I say quite often at the writers group that I attend and I fully believe that. Of course one of the key aspects is that it must be an honest critique, but that is neither here nor there for today’s essay. What does it mean when a critique or interpretation seems so very at odds with a common view of the work?

For example that was an on-line dust up some time back over the SF/Horror film They Live. Quite a few Alt-Right types were very adamant that the aliens in the movie were a metaphor for a world wide Jewish conspiracy and that the story in fact validated the alt-right and other anti-Semites terrible worldview. John Carpenter, who wrote the screenplay and directed the film, insisted that the metaphor was for capitalism, conservatism, and specifically Ronald Reagan’s brand of political thought. In the on-line postings we have clear authorial intent but presuming the Alt-Right and other are not lying, how can I suggest that their interpretation is correct?

The key to understanding this is that communication is never as simple as one agent creates a message and transmits it to another agent who then receives that intended message. The process is more like the sending agent encodes a message, transmits it, the receiver decodes the message and then looks to understand it, that encoding/decoding transformation it critical in how a message is interpreted.

In the case of They Live, Carpenter used alien to encode his metaphor but in the decoding process everyone uses their own set of symbols and lived experiences, including everything that they have been taught or believe to be true, as a lens to color the transmission. For the Alt-Right types that can include the anti-Semitic garbage in their own operating system, hence they decoded a message that was anti-capitalist and anti-conservative into a narrative palatable to their own prejudices. Their critique and analysis, if honest, is correct for them but only because their decoding process seriously distorts reality.

So when there is an interpretation of a work that is significantly out of step with both authorial intent, when it is know, and the general interpretation that outliers conclusions says much more about the filters and lens of the critiquing agency than it does about the work itself.

Share

The Need Argument

Often when there is a debate about prohibiting, restricting, or permitting an object or service someone will make what I call the ‘need argument.’ It is very simple, they will point out that the person against the new restriction doesn’t really need whatever it is that the proponent is calling to ban or restrict.

It is an insidious tactic that has as its base assumption that the person proposing the restriction has already determined the ‘need’ and found it wanting. I reject the need argument nearly categorically. It is an argument designed to trap the person debating for access into a box where they must attempt to meet an ill-defined criteria held by the proponent or surrender and since the criteria is not something mutually agreed to but is instead always defined by the proponent it is something that cannot be met.

The call comes over and over, it comes in taxations, ‘they don’t need that money,’ it comes in healthcare ‘they don’t need that transition,’ it comes in legalities ‘they don’t need that marriage,’ it comes in the arts and entertainment, ‘they don’t need that filth or that violent game.’

It does not matter where it raises its head the ‘need argument’ is always an attempt to impose the concept, I don’t want that thing so you do not get it either.

If you are going to push for prohibitions or confiscations get a better argument, and there are always better arguments.

Share

Movie Review: Annihilation

On Saturday after a trying cold and flu season I finally managed to find the time to get out to the theaters and catch Alex Garland’s latest film Annihilation. Based on the novel with the same name Annihilation was written and directed by Garland who also gave us the fascinating SF film Ex Machina. (Garland also penned the scripts for 28 Days Later, and Dredd.) I have not read the originally novel, though I understand significant changes were made in the adaptation process, and so I will not be commenting on the quality of the adaptation.

Annihilation is about an event called the Shimmer that originated with the impact of an extra-terrestrial object. The Shimmer is centered on a lighthouse and since the object’s impact has been expanding, consuming more territory within its borders. All devices and teams sent into the Shimmer lose communication and none have returned, leaving the zone a mystery. The lead character is Lena, a biologist who is pulled into the secret of the Shimmer when her husband mysteriously returns. In order to try to determine what has happened to her husband, Lena volunteers to accompany the next team being sent into the zone. This team, unlike all the others, is comprised entirely of women and represents a number of disciplines and skills. Inside the zone the women are confronted with a bizarre and difficult to understand environment as things living in the effect take on radically new forms. Cut off from communication and help, frayed by their own psychological issues, the team pushes deeper in the Shimmer towards the lighthouse and hopefully the answers to the mystery.

The cast of Annihilation is top shelf, Natalie Portman plays the lead Lena and she is supported by Gina Rodriguez, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Tessa Thompson with Oscar Isaac playing Lena’s husband Kane. All of these actors are skilled and have played in some of the biggest films of the last decade. Tessa Thompson took people by storm with her portrayal of Valkyrie in Thor: Ragnarok. Her character here is very removed from the boisterous on top of things Valkyrie demonstrating a range that I think we have only begun to experience.

Annihilation is never going to be a mass-market success. Unlike many films this one requires active interpretation. Ex Machina left its ending open to audience interpretation but Annihilation the entire final act is more akin to something one might see in an art house film. It is more accessible than say a David Lynch movie this is not a movie that spells out for you what it means or what precisely has transpired. As such this is not a movie for everyone. I enjoyed it, I am glad I saw it in the theater, but it is unlikely to find a home in my library. More than most films you mileage may vary and if it works for you or not will depend greatly on your personal tastes.

Share

Movie Review: The Death of Stalin

This is a film my sweetie-wife and I have been looking forward to for a few months. From the creative mind Armando Iannucci, the man behind Britain’s The Thick of It and HBO’s Veep. The Death of Stalin is a fictionalized, partially farcical partly horrific account of the power struggle following the death of the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin 1953. As with all dramatic films based on historical events one should not aspire to learn history from a movie.

While the film possesses Iannucci’s distinctive farcical characterizations and sense of absurdity when dealing with powerful bureaucratic people it also has sense of totalitarian terror. Often these two disparate elements are separated by only a cut creating a juxtaposition truly worthy of Soviet film montage theory. This clash of the farcical and the terrible has been commented in other reviews and for many reviewers it was off putting. However I think that the effect Iannucci was striving for was an understanding and emotional reality of how the absurd becomes the terrible so easily. The whiplash of the competing tones keeps the viewer off balance and unable to emotionally predict the coming scenes much like how the people brutalized by such a reign of terror live in a constant state of anxiety.

The plot concerns itself with two man who are vying to take Stalin place following his fatal stroke, Nikita Krushchev head of the Communist Party, and Lavrentiy Beria, head of the NKVD, the regime’s dread secret police. Krushchev is presented as the reformed, the man who wants to stop the mass murders, the false imprisonments, the reign of terror, while Beria, in addition to being the man carrying out all the murder and torture, is portrayed as a ruthless figure with depraved sexual appetites. Like all worthy protagonists Khrushchev is fighting beyond his weight class, Beria has prepared for this moment and moves with ruthless efficiency as he consolidates the power into his hands. Given the brutal nature of the struggle this rapidly transforms the contest into one of survival.

Steven Buscemi plays Krushchev. He makes no attempt, nor for the most part does the other actors, to adopt a Russian accent and his portrayal is one filled with the anxiety of a man over his head. There is a passing reference to Krushchev’s service at Stalingrad so it is also clear that this man is no wilting flower. Simon Russell Beale plays Beria and it is about as far from his role of Falstaff in The Hollow Crown as is possible. Despite these powerful performances the scene-stealer in this movie is Jason Isaacs, possibly best know to genre fans as Lucius Malfoy in the Harry Potter franchise, as Zhukov, head of the army. Zhukov both historically and in the film is a larger than life character and one that dominates every scene in which he appears.

The final casting element I want to discuss is Foreign Minister Molotov. A man who is on the outs and destined to appear on one of Stalin’s dreaded lists, Molotov is played with nervous energy my Python alumni Michael Palin. In addition to a fine bit of casting, this also I think draws a direct connection between The Death of Stalin and it cinematic cousin, Brazil. There is no doubt in my mind that these two absurd dark films are speaking with one voice. Gilliam and Iannucci both seem to be concerned, and rightly so, about the abuses of power, the childish nature of those chasing it, and in the end the terror that promises for everyone under their heels.

The Death of Stalin is not a movie for everyone. The clashing of humor and horror is designed to be jarring but it is a film I thoroughly enjoyed.

Share