Author Archives: Bob Evans

Why I Dislike the Doomsday Clock

Recently the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved the hands of their ‘doomsday’ clock to two minutes to midnight, with midnight representing “how close we are to destroying our world with dangerous technologies of our own making.”

The clock started in 1947 and for most of its existence the reference was to all out nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union. It is a potent symbol of our fears of the terrible price humanity could pay in a full nuclear war. A symbol used by Alan Moore in his classic graphical work Watchmen.

My problem with the Doomsday Clock is that is gives the impression of something quantified and scientific when it is really an opinion. The fact that the group is named The Bulletin of Atomic Scientist conjures up the impression of serious people in white coat armed with complex calculations when really watch we are seeing is the results of their own fears and impressions.

There is no quantifiable system by which the clock can be judged. There is no testable hypothesis, and objective formula, only their guess and yet every motion of the clock’s minute hand is treated with great reverence. A reverence that comes solely from the fact it is scientists making these opinion based proclamations.

Is it really two minutes to midnight? Hell, how can anyone know? I do know that I dislike quantifiable number being used to justify mere opinion.

Share

The Inevitable Disappointment

Over the last few months a television series my sweetie-wife I have enjoy is Shetland. Based on a series of mystery novels by Ann Cleeves the series takes place on the far north Scottish island of Shetland where DCI (Detective Chief Inspector) Jimmy Perez solves murders and balances being a widower father and returning island native.

The series has run for three seasons and a total of 14 episodes, 8 of which are direct adaptation of the original novels with the final 6 an original mystery created by the producers.

It is those final six, the entirety of the third season where the show disappointed me. With the earlier adaptations two episodes were used for each novel and the general mood of each piece was one of clues, detective work, and hidden motives. The final storyline became a tangles mess of witness protection, mob corruption, and amazing coincidences that came off more like a standard cop show than the original mysteries I had enjoyed.

I was particularly annoyed with one sub-plot in the final season.

SPOILERS FOLLOW

Six episodes long that story broke into a three-act structure with two episodes per act. As the end of the second act one of the police characters is kidnapped by the mob to send a message to DCI Perez. Naturally it is our sympathetic female cop DS Allison ‘Tosh’ Macintosh. As soon as the third act opens she is released but naturally there has been a sexual assault.

I can’t tell you how tired I am of the third act assault/killing/murder to motivate the hero. Here there is no real plot justification, the entire subplot could be removed with very little effect on the main and convoluted story. It is cliché, and it uses the sexual assault not as the principle event of it’s own story but as a plot detail in someone else’s story. Yes the writers deal with it tastefully, never showing it, never making it titillating, exploring ramifications for Tosh and the people around her, and even a little lecturing by our heroes on the injustice women face when trying to have these crimes prosecuted, but it’s all sub-plot and a tired, worn out sub-plot at that.

Share

Content vs. Style in Film Noir

One of the enjoyable discussions at the recent Condor SF convention was about noir on television and naturally the topic shifted to film noir in general. An important aspect to any discussion about noir films is that the definition is applied to the classics retroactively. While the term was first coined in 1946 it wasn’t until the 1970s, well after the classic period of noir cinema, that the notion gained general acceptance. That means when the filmmakers were making movies like Double Indemnity, Out of the Past, or Asphalt Jungle they were not setting out to make film noir. This lack of an accepted definition means that one of the hotly contested areas of discussion is what is noir anyway?

Usually this breaks down into two major camps, those who advocate style and those of emphasize content.

The style adherents maintain that it is the general mood, elements, and cinematography that best defines film noir, with the most strict supports even advocating that it simply is not possible to have a true noir that is in color.

For those support the content arguments, of which I count myself, it is the story details and for me the nature of the characters that best define the genre. While the impressive and German Expressionism inspired photography of Double Indemnity is perfect for the mood of that film it is the appetite for money and sex and how that appetite destroys the characters that makes it a noir in my opinion. It is more than the use of sharp shadows and stark contrasts that make a property truly a noir.

In my opinion Polanski’s Chinatown is very much a noir as is L.A. Confidential, even though both are in color and make use of brilliant sunny Southern California settings to contrast the corruption and decay hiding under the surface. I would also count Blue Velvet as an example of the genre while the style remains very much Lynch’s own and not a homage to the classic noirs.

Perhaps, the best argument against a stylistic definition is with one of my favorite films, Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid. From the comedic minds of Carl Reiner and Steve Martin the movies is a farcical parody of the genre. Shot is black-and-white with all the deep shadows and sharp contrasts Dead Men apes the style perfectly. It has it because much of the film utilizes clips from classic noirs and with careful staging and editing presents these scenes as all taking place within their own movie. It is a project that could only be created by people who love this particular genre and it is fiercely funny.

But is it noir?

I would argue it is not, though it perfectly captures the style of a noir the content, parody and farce, place it far afield from those dark and cynical stories. So to me if you have a film that captures the style but cannot be considered a film noir then the definition must be more than style, it must include content.

Share

My Personal Film Festival

So, the end of the year period is the time frame where I tend to do a lot of overtime at my day-job. My habit is to take the extra funds generated by the OT, set them aside, and buy myself something nice with that loot. This year it will be replacing my 10-year-old flat screen television. I am looking at a Sony X900E in the 55″ size for my next television. I will be waiting until after the upcoming copyrighted sporting event to make that purchase, as it is not uncommon for TVs to go on sale at that time.

Once the new television is installed and ready to go for a few friends and family I will then host my Cold War Movie Marathon; three films about the cold war, produced during the cold war.

1) The Manchurian Candidate (1962). I selected this film, one of my personal favorites, to capture the essence of paranoia the infused the period. With terrific performances by Lawrence Harvey, Angela Lansbury, and Frank Sinatra it is a classic.

2) The Spy Who Came in From the Cold (1965) Based on the novel by John Le Carre this is the dark and realistic tale of an intelligence officer attempting one final field mission. This one I picked for its excellent sense of cynicism and the moral ambiguity of the both sides during the protracted contest. Starring Richard Burton this movie is pretty much the polar opposite of a James Bond movie.

3) Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) I will end the series with this classic dark comedy from film genius Stanley Kubrick. Inspired by the novel Red Alert, Kubrick started the production as a serious dramatic film, but quickly found that his preferred method of dealing with such terrible subject matter was to turn it into farce, had it remained a dramatic film I think it would have been remembered but not a classic. Strangelove by being a farce captures the absurdity of that nuclear standoff and the insanity of the period.

Share

A Very Pleasant Weekend

The nation is suffering the grips of a nasty flu season and that fact certainly impacted this weekend local SF convention, Condor. Staff and attendance were below regular levels due to the illnesses sweeping the county. That said, the people putting together and running the convention overcame these challenges and I, for one, had a wonderful time at the con.

As you may have seen from my Thursday post I was assigned at a lot of panels and man was that fun. I interacted with a lot of smart, sharp, and engaging co-panelists on a wide variety of topics. All the discussions were spirited without devolving into arguments. The audiences for the panels were engaged, offering up good comments and questions.

I want to give my deepest thanks to the programmers for letting me participate in sop many panels, it was tremendous fun, and to everyone who came and participated in the convention. I look forward with great anticipation to Condor 26 next year.

Share

Come see me at Condor

This weekend, starting tomorrow Friday January 19th, is San Diego’s local SF convention, Condor.

Condor is small, intimate, and friendly convention, and one I have always enjoyed even before I began appearing on the panel discussions.

Here is my schedule for the weekend. It’s the busiest one I have gotten yet and it looks to be loads of fun.

 

Friday

Noon: If I Had A Time Machine. Room: Presidio

1pm: How Reliable is Science. Room: Garden II

3pm: This Is A Game? Room: Garden II

4pm: Social and Economic Ramifications of Teleport. Room: Garden II

6pm: Post-Apocalypse Fiction. Room: Presidio

9pm: First Line, Last Line. Room: Garden I

10pm: Can I Get A Prozac. Room: Garden II

 

Saturday

10am: Online-Only TV Series. Room: Garden II

1pm: TV Noir Part Deux. Room: Presidio

2pm: Friend’s Sidekicks, and Other Hooligans. Room: Garden II

4pm: My Favorite Doctor. Room: Presidio

6pm: Large Scale Continuity in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Room: Balboa

8pm: Back to the Future. Room: Balboa

9pm: Scientific Urban Legends. Room Balboa

 

Sunday

10am: Our Favorite Time Travel Movies & Shows. Room: Presidio

Noon: Six-Guns, 38s and Laser Pistols. Room: Garden II

1pm: The Internet: Valuable Research Tool or Kitten Photo Gallery? Room: Presidio

3pm: City on the Edge of Forever. Room: Presidio

Share

Documentary Review: Five Came Back

I did not get any fiction writing completed last night. While I have finally gotten over my flu, and this year’s number is quite a little beast, early in the evening the migraine gnomes arrived with his less than anticipated gifts. Instead, after taking the required medications, I settled into to complete a documentary series that I had started while still recovering from my flu; Five Came Back.

A Netflix original and based on the book of the same name this series, three episode each just over an hour in length, examines the lives of five legendary and award winning directors before during and after their service in World War II. Each man served as a filmmaker and as with everyone else who saw service in that global and terrible conflict each was changed by their experience. The Five were John Houston, John Ford, William Wyler, George Stevens, and Frank Capra.

The films produced by these men range from instructional movies and cartoon, including the classic Private SNAFU which featured the earlier work of Ted Geisel better known as Dr. Seuss, through blatant propaganda, and touching revelations about the ravages of psychic wounds.

A movie I commented on here a few months ago, Know Your Enemy: Japan a racist piece of propaganda, I can happily report was never actually screen to our troops. It only made it to the front just three days after the surrender and MacArthur banned its presentation.

If you have an interest in film, history, and the Venn diagram where these two fascinating fields overlap I cannot this series enough.

Share

The Framing

Whenever a story or narrative is presented there is also a framing as to how that story is presented. The frame, a negative space of assumptions and implicit understandings, guides in both how the story is told and how the story is understood. When you can see this supporting scaffolding you have a better understanding of what was left unsaid.

Usually the framing is not a conscious choice. All of us work from assumptions and things we simply accept implicitly so all of us use these shortcuts as foundations, but it is a good exercise to think about and search out these assumptions. Sometimes there are true, sometimes they are harmless fictions, but sometimes they reveal an uglier set of cultural biases.

Consider America’s current opioid crisis. There are tons of stories out there about the economic hardship, cultural devastation, and despair that have acted as the engine driving this addiction crisis. In addition to those factors others narratives portray the major pharmaceutical corporations as the bad guys, pushing drugs onto a weakened and depressed population.

There are several aspects to this framing of these narratives. There is the condescension, about theses economically and emotionally depressed people and how they have turned to drugs to alleviate their distress. There is also an element of agency-less. These poor people are victims of circumstance and forces beyond their control, pushed and pulled into a terrible addiction without the ability to determine their own course of action. It is not coincidence that the narratives tend to be crafted by elites in great urban centers about people and sub-cultures that the authors have little or no direct experience with.

But there is another layer to the framing and to see that one you need to think back on other great addiction waves and the narratives associated with those health crises.

When the crack cocaine epidemic swept the nation’s urban centers throughout the late 80s and into the 90s do you remember such sympathetic narratives? Did the author of article after article go into the terrible economic conditions of the decaying urban centers? Were column inches devoted to the hopelessness and despair that swept through the effected communities?

I will leave it to the reader to come to their own conclusions why the framing narratives have changed so radically.

Share

No Oprah in 2020

I have nothing against her as a person or her talent and considerable achievements but Oprah Winfrey has two large strikes against her for being a serious contender for POTUS.

First, she has no experience in government, and this is scarcely the place for On the Job Training. Even in the best of times that is a bad idea and following the correct occupant this nation will need someone with mastery and knowledge in government, diplomacy in all their intricacies to help begin repairing the damage. Some of which may take decades if ever to undo. We cannot trust that to a novice.

Second, the most important characteristic in selecting a person for leadership is judgment. We are not installing someone to simply mirror the public mood, polls can do that, we need someone who can weigh evidence and come to consistent sound conclusions. In many area it would appear that she can do this, but her repeated instances of giving platform and support to pseudo-science and quackery including anti-vaxxer madness, disqualifiers her as clearer as if she were a climate denier. Truly it is the same thing just pushing different crackpot ideologies.

She is a tremendous woman, a talented businessperson, and a passion advocate, but she should never be president.

Share

Running for President for Fun and Profit

There is an excerpt from Michael Wolff’s upcoming book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House where Wolff reports that Trump did not want to be president and that he and his people fully expected to lose. The gist of the story is that Trump and others ran the campaign as a method of creating branding, expanding media connections, and in general as a moneymaking operation. (Wolff also reports that Trump went through a number of stages of shock and fear before becoming certain that he was going to be a great president. He lacks nothing in grandiose self-image that is not backed up by anything resembling talent, intelligence, or taste.)

Now some have taken issue with Wolff’s report and poked holes where the details do not align with history so we’ll have to wait a bit longer for that judgment. However I find it entirely credible that Trump at least started the campaign as a moneymaking and image enhancing

The Republican Party has allowed charlatans and grifters access to the presidential nominating process, business people, second tier politicians turned TV personalities, and flash in the pan conservative celebrities flooded the fields, turning the solemn and serious affair of selecting the person to lead the most powerful nation on earth into a cash grab and celebrity stepping stone platform.

It’s really should not have been a surprise that eventually this charade, coupled with a base that had been purified to that rejected facts for ideology, would eventually shove aside any serious politician for the flashier, louder, and most grandiose snake-oil pusher.

This is the doom that the GOP has visited upon America and on the world. This is the end result of their cynicism, their abandonment of principal, and the surrendering of all their honor.

There are a lot of things in traditional conservative thought that are worth considering, worth valuing, worth upholding, but covered in gold plated, celebrity apprentice crap, it all becomes crap.

The nation needs a new conservative party.

Share