There is nothing wrong with the internet.
Do not attempt to reboot.
The Crotchety Old Fan is controlling transmission.
I will control the baud rate.
I will control the resolution.
I can soften search results,
or sharpen them to crystal clarity.
For the next hour, sit quietly and I will control all that you see and hear (actually, only for so long as you keep reading). I repeat, there is nothing wrong with the internet.
You are about to participate in a great adventure.
You are about to experience the awe and mystery that reaches from the blogosophere to The Crotchety Old Fan Retro Reviews!

Doesn’t have quite the same ring to it as the original one delivered by the Control Voice, does it?

But that doesn’t stop me from really enjoying the ability to re-watch one of my favorite of-all-time television shows, the original Outer Limits.

Once I managed to get a hold of a complete set of all of the episodes, I decided that it would be instructive to re-watch them in broadcast presentation order – that is, the pilot and first episode first, the second episode second and so on. Not ever having been able to do so when the show was originally broadcast, this would be new for me. It would also keep me from simply concentrating on favorite episodes (actually, those episodes that seem to get picked all the time by the folks who do the re-runs) and might help me get enough distance to be able to evaluate them with something of an open mind (kinda tuff when you have all the original collector cards, comic books and audio tracks of the intro, not to mention being able to recite the entire original* Control Voice intro from memory).

The reviews were to begin over a week ago, but due to illness, I’ve been unable to concentrate or devote myself to them. Fortunately, I don’t need to go on the cart (I’m not dead yet and no one is sneaking up behind me with a club) as I’m all better now. We’ll begin with the first episode to be broadcast, which was also the pilot for the series.

But first, a brief aside.

Sometimes I feel that going back over things that I consider to be classic (valuable, enjoyable, cutting edge, creative, ground-breaking) is a futile exercise. I know that many of my contemporaries will probably enjoy at least some aspects of the nostalgia trip, but what I really hope to do is entice some of the younger fans to check these things out with an open mind. I fear that there are many obstacles to that desire, many of which are beyond my (perhaps anyone’s) ability to get past.

In re-watching these episodes, I’ve noticed that there are several elements that are required in order to truly appreciate them, and I fear that some, if not all of those elements are simply not present in the set of media-receiving skills inherent in more recently decanted generations. And I’m afraid that developing those skills is something that’s just too boring, unrewarding and perhaps unnecessary in the face of today’s computer-aided technologies.

There are three specific things I refer to: the skilled use of black and white photography (light and shadow and their interplay), the use of visual metaphor and the ability to pick up on visual cues for relying on internal imaginative powers.

I’ll address these (briefly) one at a time: if all you have experience with is color-saturated television and movies, it’s no surprise that you find B&W flat and boring. You’ve not had an opportunity to learn how shadings and shadow, focus, point sources, and lighting intensity are used. Considering that the masters of B&W techniques only had TWO colors to work with, and that the really good ones managed to transmit as much (or nearly as much) information to the viewer as current film does with an unlimited palette, it should come as no surprise that the viewer has to work a little harder to receive all of that tightly compacted data. Having grown up with the language, such work comes as second nature – so much so that it is actually possible to “guess” what the real color of things are based on their shade – a skill that would be entirely lost to a modern day viewer.

And that’s the simple part. More complicated are things like mood-setting (light and airy = fun, or safe, or happy; dark and obscured = scary, or ominous), character definition (splitting someones face into half lighted/half-shadowed, or intensifying the light around their eyes, darkening their brow can foreshadow the kind of character they are going to be). People, places and things all get defined, foreshadowed, accentuated by the manner in which they are lighted – or not lighted, by how long they remain in the light or by the manner in which they pass into shadow (a quick transition into darkness can foreshadow a bad ending, a slow and pleasant fade into darkness a peaceful one).

If you have no experience in how to read these cues, an entire layer of meaning will be lost to you.

Similarly, visual metaphor seems to have become a lost art on television (if not in film). For example, in one up-coming episode (The Man With The Power), Donald Pleasance plays a school teacher who dreams of being a more important man; his wife (a shrew) has no respect for him and shows it. When Donald finally becomes a member of the staff of the big space research project he was seeking, he proudly rushes home to tell his wife – who doesn’t believe him. This relationship is revealed through the dialogue, but what cements it, makes it stronger and does so in an emotional, rather than an intellectual way, is the visual metaphor presented while the conversation is taking place. Donald’s wife is trimming the hedges with a large pair of shears. With every verbal cut she delivers, the camera focuses on her hard, forceful cutting of the shrub. As she delivers her final, disparaging line, completely destroying Donald’s ego, the camera focuses in on one final branch sticking up above the hedge as it is mercilessly chopped off.

Verbally and visually, Donald’s wife is cutting him back to size, making sure that his ambition doesn’t carry him above the rest of the shrubs, denying him the additional sunlight he needs. Donald must conform, must remain like the shrub which is only “beautiful” when it is nice and even.

Again, picking up on these kinds of cues, which were developed to help the visual story teller pack more meaning into the time frame allowed, is an art not easily taught. Today’s shows seldom resort to such (or perhaps they’ve morphed into a form unrecognizable to me, which in reverse pretty much amounts to the same thing). An inability to pick up on the information contained within them robs the story of yet another layer of meaning.

Finally, cueing the viewer to contribute their own imaginative powers. What does the thing on the other side of the door look like? What could possibly be making that sound? Why is everyone looking away in horror?

Today, film and television show us – because they can (and also, I believe, because directors have a desire to stick their own monsters into our heads because that makes it easier to sell toys).

Maybe it’s me, but the monsters in my head – the unnamed fears and terrors that we all carry with us – are far more terrifying than anything anyone could possibly create. This is because they remain formless, the raw stuff of our basest emotions and instincts.

Imagination made people run into the streets with shotguns on Halloween eve back in 1938 when Orson Welles produced his infamous broadcast – and he hadn’t set out to intentionally cause panic. About the closest we’ve come in modern times to achieving that same effect can be found in the film Cloverfield where the audience is never given a clear image of the monster.

Now it is true that quite often, early television anthology shows (that featured the bizarre and alien) often resorted to the “shadow” trick because they simply didn’t have the budget to put a convincing other up on the screen, but in most respects this is not true of The Outer Limits. The show was fairly well budgeted and in the very episode I’m covering here, the technical expertise of the SFX folks is on full display. The creature effect was created through the clever use of film negatives superimposed over a normal image. Some may say that in light of today’s technology the Galaxy Being is a bit hokey, leaves something to be desired, but I still see that creature through much younger eyes and its first appearance still gives me the creepy-crawlies.

Regardless, the point here is that cueing the viewer to engage their imaginative powers was a regular technique, achieved through dialogue, facial expression, camera angle and more. The viewer was subtly told ‘now it is time for you to fill in the blanks’, and we all happily did so (often discussing what it really looked like the next day at school or around the water cooler).

Without the language necessary to pick up on such cues, the modern viewer is treated to an exercise similar to reading a Mad Libs piece without being allowed to fill in the blanks. You get the story outline, but the adjectives have been rendered colorless.

Any new viewer is therefore facing three distinct and difficult hurdles before ever even having a chance to evaluate story, characterization, acting or any of the other elements.  I strongly urge new viewers to take such into consideration before dismissing any of the older, classic materials.  Perhaps in doing so you’ll give yourselves some new tools which should greatly enhance your enjoyment – not only of the classics but of newer materials as well.

That brief aside now concluded, I turn your attention to the fact that I’ve included a full program listing for all of the episodes at the end of the review.

The Galaxy Being

Cliff Robertson plays the owner of a radio station who’s side hobby is radio astronomy.  Following a lot of fiddling with transistors and boosting his home-built (tape-driven) computerized inter-galactic communication device with a powerful transmitter, he has succeeded in making contact with an alien intelligence, one that inhabits a fourth dimension, a being of energy rather than matter.

Here’s the problem though:  Cliff is obsessed and his obsession is threatening both his marriage and the family-owned business.  He’s abandoned the things that are really important, like his wife and the radio station which has become so successful that he’s due for a Chamber of Commerce award as businessman of the year.

Cliff has been stealing power from the station for his hobby and the reduction of his broadcast footprint is making the advertisers unhappy.  And his wife just wants some face time.

Poor Cliff – right when things start getting really interesting (like becoming the first human being to communicate with an alien intelligence) everyone around him is wasting his time on mundanity!

The alien – unlike most from this era – actually seems pretty benevolent.  Both the Galaxy Being and Cliff have something in common – neither is supposed to be using their equipment for extra-galactic communication purposes;  this extra little bit of tension motivates their desire to keep things on the down-low and helps convince us all that their conversations are going to remain on the intellectual side of things, such as when they discuss the concept of death – something which is not in the  alien’s experience.

Cliff’s wife is not about to let him destroy himself with some hare-brained hobby and she finally convinces him that he needs to attend the award dinner – which Cliff does reluctantly.

And this is when things begin to go wrong (stupid monkies!);  a relief DJ, brought in to run the station so that Cliff’s brother (who normally fills that role) can attend the dinner as well, is carefully instructed NOT to mess with the station’s power usage (half the power is being used to maintain the connection to the Galaxy Being).  Mr. Knowitall is naturally tempted by the possibility of broadcasting his voice all the way up into Canada and he carelessly turns the power dial all the way up to the max.

The boosted power pulls the Galaxy Being out of his dimension and into ours.  But Cliff can’t do anything to stop or contain it because – he’s too busy making his wife happy at the award dinner.

The Galaxy Being is naturally curious and (apparently) easily frightened.  It is also (unfortunately) armed with the ability to melt and disintegrate things simply by looking at them.  It’s casual investigatory walk through downtown where-ever scares a lot of people, destroys some stuff and causes the national guard to be turned out. (They were a lot more readily available during the 50’s and 60’s due to that red scare thingie.)

Cliff finally manages to get a handle on the situation, prevents a mutual slaughter through quick-thinking diplomacy, the Galaxy Being fixes up Cliff’s wife (accidentally shot by the NG) and the Galaxy Being altruistically fades from existence in order to prevent any further problems.

The control voice closes by informing us that fear is not a useful tool for investigating the wonders of the universe.

Though not one of my favorites, The Galaxy Being does keep me interested and engaged and is not a bad story.  The acting and special effects are pretty darned good, though there is one bit of hokiness that I quite enjoyed – Cliff’s initial conversation with the Being:  he explains that he’s speaking in English and points to a star map (Sol-oriented naturally) saying “I am here, where are you?”.  This is an obvious gloss over the fact that it would take hours – if not months or years – to work through the translation issues.  (Maybe Cliff is just a heck of a lot smarter – and his computer a lot more advanced – than I give him credit for.)

The message is a fairly common one – but what I found most interesting was that the plot didn’t actually match the message.  The story in fact is about a guy who gets in trouble twice because he allows himself to be dissuaded from his passions:  first he abandons his wife and business in favor of the hobby (when he was obviously good and successful at both:  Abandoning them may cost him both of them) and then he allows himself to be persuaded to abandon his hobby – with disastrous and near-deadly consequences.

I’m not so sure though that the television audience of the early 60’s would have bought into a message that essentially says – favor your passions and ignore the mundane – but I do know that it is a message that is universally appealing to SF fans.

Until next time….

(*it was after the third or fourth episode that the familiar and final version of the Control Voice intro was settled on. Prior to that, the intro included additional lines, such as “we can roll the picture, or cause it to flutter”. And for those of you who’ve always had cable and satellite TV at their disposal – yes, stations did broadcast that test pattern and yes, you had little knobs on your TV sets that could cause the picture to do everything that the Control Voice does.)

Because the guy just does not give a good goddamned flying fuck at a rolling donut what someone else is going to think about what he says, that’s why.

If he did, we would never have gotten novels – (key, critical, seminal, outrageous, prescient and entertaining) – like Bug Jack Barron, The Iron Dream and The Men In The Jungle.

I’ve seen and understand why many are going ape shit over his review in Asimov’s – but has it not occurred to anyone that the man is intelligent, articulate, far-thinking, professional and crafty and that he might just be playing a slightly longer game than simply admitting ignorance of a swath of the genre in a fairly decently distributed and somewhat respected magazine?

You know what – I’m gonna give Norm the benefit of the doubt for right now and see what develops down the line and btw – that “benefit” comes from a guy that Norm made a half-hearted attempt to cuckold at an area convention multiple years back.

My finger is purple.

Make yours purple if you’re eligible and haven’t submitted a ballot yet.

Music remains to be handled (best, mixed, editing, etc), as do shorts, but this is the bulk of it.

You may agree or disagree with some of the films I’ve included or excluded: feel free to make your own nominations in the comments.

You may also notice a few typos – lol. I’m still sick as a dog and have no energy for anything, let alone hunting along for misspellings.

I also have not had the energy to compile the film title only list (the master list of all genre films that have been nominated and/or won an Academy award for anything).

Finally, I haven’t included information about award category changes & etc.; some awards have changed name and focus, others discontinued and new ones introduced. Where appropriate, I’ve included films in the current category they would have been nominated in during our era.

Enjoy.

BEST PICTURE

1937 Lost Horizon
1939 The Wizard of Oz
1950 King Solomon’s Mines
1956 Around the World in 80 Days WINNER
1964 Dr. Strangelove
1967 Dr. Doolittle
1971 A Clockwork Orange
1974 The Towering Inferno
1975 Jaws
1977 Star Wars
1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark
1982 E.T. The Extraterrestrial
1990 Ghost
1991 Beauty and the Beast
1999 The Sixth Sense
2001 The Lord of the Rings – Fellowship
2002 The Lord of the Rings – Two Towers
2003 The Lord of the Rings – Return – WINNER
2008 The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
2009 Avatar
2009 District 9

BEST DIRECTOR

1956 Around the world in 80 days Michael Anderson
1960 Psycho Alfred Hitchcock
1964 Dr. Strangelove Stanley Kubrick
1964 Mary Poppins Robert Stevenson
1968 2001 A Space Odyssey Stanley Kubrick
1971 A Clockwork Orange Stanley Kubrick
1977 Star Wars George Lucas
1977 Close Encounters of the Third Kind Steven Spielberg
1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark Steven Spielberg
1982 ET Steven Spielberg
1999 The Sixth Sense M Night Shyamalan
2001 The Lord of the Rings Fellowship Peter jackson
2003 The Lord of the Rings Return Peter Jackson
2008 The Curious Case of Benjamin Button David Fincher
2009 Avatar James Cameron

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

1968 2001
1977 star wars
1979 the china syndrome
1982 ET
1983 War Games
1985 back to the future
1985 brazil
1988 Big
1990 Ghost – WINNER
1995 Toy Story
1998 The Truman Show
1999 The Sixth Sense
2004 The Incredibles
2006 Pan’s Labyrinth
2008 Wall-E

BEST WRITING – ADAPTED

1931-1932 dr jekyll and mr hyde
1964 dr strangelove
1964 mary poppins
1971 a clockwork orange
1974 young frankenstein
1984 Greystoke
2001 Lord of the Rings fellowship
2003 lord of the rings return – WINNER
2006 Children of Men
2008 Curious case of benjamin button
2009 District 9

SPECIAL VISUAL EFFECTS

1964 Mary Poppins – WINNER
1965 thunderball – WINNER
1966 fantastic voyage – WINNER
1967 doctor doolittle – WINNER
1968 2001 a space odyssey – WINNER
1969 marooned – WINNER
1977 star wars – WINNER
1977 close encounters
1978 alien – WINNER
1979 the black hole
1979 moonraker
1979 star trek the motion picture
1981 dragonslayer
1981 raiders of the lost ark – WINNER
1982 blade runner
1982 et winner
1984 indiana jones and the temple of doom – WINNER
1984 2010
1085 cocoon – WINNER
1986 aliens – WINNER
1987 inner space – WINNER
1987 predator
1988 who framed roger rabbit – WINNER
1988 willow
1989 the abyss
1989 the adventures of baron munchausen
1989 back to the future 2
1991 terminator 2 – WINNER
1992 alien 3
1992 batman returns
1993 jurassic park – WINNER
1996 dragonheart
1996 independence day – WINNER
1997 the lost worl of jurassic park
1997 starship troopers
1998 armageddon
mighty joe young
1999 the matrix – WINNER
1999 star wars eisode 1
2000 the hollow man
2001 a.i.
the lord of the ring fellowship – WINNER
2002 the lord of the rings two towers – WINNER
2002 spider man
2002 star wars attack of the clones
2003 lord of the rings – WINNER
2003 pirates of the caribbean
2004 harry potter prisoner\
2004 i robot
2004 spider man 2 – WINNER
2005 the chronicles of narnia
2005 king kong – WINNER
2005 war of the worlds
2006 pirates of the caribbean dead mans chest – WINNER
2006 superman returns
2007 the golden compass – WINNER
2007 pirates of the caribbean at worlds end
2007 transformers
2008 the curious case of benjamin button – WINNER
2008 the dark knight
2008 ironman
2009 avatar – WINNER
2009 district 9
2009 star trek

BEST ACTRESS

1976 Carrie Sissy Spacek
1979 The China Syndrome Jane Fonda
1986 Aliens Sigourney Weaver

BEST ACTOR

1931-1932 Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde Frederic March – WINNER
1964 Dr. Strangelove Peter Sellers
1968 Charly Cliff Robertson – WINNER
1978 The Boys From Brazil Laurence Olivier
1979 The China Syndrome Jack Lemmon
1979 Being There Peter Sellers
1984 Starman Jeff Bridges
1988 Big Tom Hanks
2003 Pirates of the Caribbean Johnny Depp
2008 The Curious case of Benjamin Button – Brad Pitt

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

1945 The Picture of Dorian Gray Angela Lansbury
1960 Psycho Janet Leigh
1962 The Manchurian Candidate Angela Lansbury
1977 Close Encounters Melinda Dillon
1999 The Sixth Sense Toni Collette
1999 Being John Malkovitch Catherine Keener
2008 The Curiousa Case of Benjamin Button Taraji P Henson

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

1937 Lost Horizon H. B. Warner
1964 Seven Days In May Edmond O’Brien
1974 The Towering Inferno Fred Astaire
1977 Star Wars Alec Guinnes
1985 Greystoke The Legend of Tarzan Ralph Richardson
1985 Cocoon Don Ameche – WINNER
1995 12 Monkeys Brad Pitt
1998 The Truman Show Ed Harris
1999 The Sixth Sense Haley Joel Osment
2000 Shadow of the Vampire Willem DaFoe
2001 The Lord of the Rings – Fellowship Ian McKellan
2008 The Dark Knight Heath Ledger – WINNER

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

2001 Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius
2001 Monsters, Inc.
2001 Shrek winner
2002 treasure planet
2004 the incredibles

BEST SUPPORTIN ACTOR

1937 Lost Horizon H. B. Warner
1964 Seven Days In May Edmond O’Brien
1974 The Towering Inferno Fred Astaire
1977 Star Wars Alec Guinnes
1985 Greystoke The Legend of Tarzan Ralph Richardson
1985 Cocoon Don Ameche – WINNER
1995 12 Monkeys Brad Pitt
1998 The Truman Show Ed Harris
1999 The Sixth Sense Haley Joel Osment
2000 Shadow of the Vampire Willem DaFoe
2001 The Lord of the Rings – Fellowship Ian McKellan
2008 The Dark Knight Heath Ledger – WINNER

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

2004 shrek 2
2005 wallace and gromit curse of the were rabbit – WINNER
2008 wall-e – WINNER
2009 coraline

BEST ANIMATED SHORT

1935 the calico dragon
1936 popeye the sailor meets Sinbad the sailor
1938 the brave little tailor
1939 peace on earth
1940 the milky way – WINNER
1941 superman
1947 dr jekyl and mr mouse
1953 the tell tale heart
1962 the hole – WINNER
1993 the wrong trousers – WINNER
1995 the chicken from outerspace

BEST ART DIRECTION

1937 lost horizon – WINNER
1939 The Wizard of Oz
1940 The Thief of Baghdad – WINNER
1943 The Phantom of the Opera – WINNER
1950 Destination moon
1954 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea – WINNER
1956 Around the World in 80 Days
1959 Journey to the Center of the earth
1960 Psycho
1960 Visit to a Small Planet
1961 The Absent Minded Professor
1964 Seven Days in May (B&W)
1964 Mary Poppins (color)
1966 Fantastic Voyage – WINNER
1967 Doctor Doolittle
1968 2001: A Spacey Odyssey
1971 The Andromeda Strain
1974 The Island at the Top of the World
1974 The Towering Inferno
1976 Logan’s Run
1977 Close Encounters
1979 Alien
1979 The China Syndrome
1979 Star Trek the Motion Picture
1980 The Empire Strikes Back
1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark – WINNER
1982 Blade Runner
1983 Star Wars Return of the Jedi
1984 2010
1985 Brazil
1986 Aliens
1988 Who Framed Roger Rabbit
1989 Batman
1989 The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
1992 Bram Stoker’s Dracula
1993 Addam’s Fasmily Values
1994 Interview with a Vampire
1997 Gattaca
1997 Men in Black
2001 Harry Potter sorcerers stone
2001 Lord of the Rings Fellowship
2002 Lord of the Rings two towers
2003 Lord of the Rings Return – WINNER
2004 The Phantom of the Opera
2005 King Kong
2006 Pan’s Labryinth – WINNER
2006 Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Man’s Chest
2007 The Golden Compass
2008 Curious Case of Benjamin Button – WINNER
2008 The Dark Knight
2009 Avatar
2009 Nine

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHER

1940 The Thief of Baghdad (color) – WINNER
1943 The Phasntom of the Opera (color) – WINNER
1945 The Picture of Dorian Gray (b&W) – WINNER
1950 King Solomon’as Mines (color) – WINNER
1956 Around the World in 80 Days (color) – WINNER
1967 Dr Doolittle
1969 Marooned
1975 The Towering Inferno – WINNER
1976 Logan’s Run
1977 Close Encounters – WINNER
1979 The Black Hole
1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark
1982 ET
1983 War games
1986 Star Trek IV
1988 Who Framed Roger Rabbit
1989 The Abyss
1991 Terminator II
1995 Batman Forever
2001 The Lord of the Rings Fellowship – WINNER
2004 The Phantom of the Opera
2005 Batman Begins
2006 Pan’s Labyrinth – WINNER
2006 Chuildren of Men
2008 Curious Case of Benjamin Button
2008 The Dark Knight
2009 Avatar – WINNER
2009 Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

BEST COSTUME DESIGN

1956 Around the world in 80 days
1968 Planet of the Apes
1977 Star Wars – WINNER
1982 Tron
1984 2010
1989 Adventures of Baron Munchausen
1991 The Addams Family
1992 Bram Stoker’s Dracula – WINNER
1995 Twelve Monkeys
2001 Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone
2001 Lord of the Rings Fellowship
2003 Lord of the Rings Return – WINNER
2008 Curious case of Benjamin button
2009 Nine

BEST EDITING

1937 Lost Horizon – WINNER
1953 The War of the Worlds
1954 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
1956 Around the World in 80 Days – WINNER
1966 Fantastic Voyage
1971 The Andromeda Strain
1971 A Clockwork Orange
1974 The Towering Inferno – WINNER
1977 Star Wars – WINNER
1977 Close Encounters
1978 The Boyz From Brazil
1978 Superman
1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark – WINNER
1982 ET
1986 Aliens
1987 Robocop
1991 Terminator 2
1999 The Matrix – WINNER
1999 The Sixth Sense
2001 Lord of the Rings – Fellowship
2002 Lord of the Rings – Two Towers
2003 Lord of the Rings – Return – WINNER
2006 Children of Men
2009 Avatar
2009 District 9

BEST MAKE UP

1981 An American Werewolf in London – WINNER
1982 Quest for Fire
1984 Greystoke
1984 2010
1986 The Fly – WINNER
1986 Clan of the Cave Bear
1986 Legend
1989 The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
1990 Edward Scissorhands
1991 Terminator 2 – WINNER
1991 Star Trek Undiscovered Country
1992 Bram Stoker’s Dracula – WINNER
1992 Batman Returns
1994 Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein
1996 The Nutty Professor – WINNER
1996 Star Trek First Contact
1997 Men in Black – WINNER
1999 Bicentennial Man
2001 Lord of the Rings Fellowship – WINNER
2002 The Time Machine
2003 Lord of the Rings Return – WINNER
2003 Pirates of the Caribbean – Curse
2005 Chronicles of Narnia – WINNER
2005 Star Wars Revenge of the Sith
2006 Pan’s Labyrinth – WINNER
2008 Curious Case of Benjamin Button – WINNER
2008 Dark Knight
2008 Hellboy
2009 Star Trek – WINNER

Regardless. Whatever mammal you insert – that’s how ill I am right now with some kind of upper-respiratory crud that started last night and has me feeling very loopy right now (like my sinuses are squeezing my brain).

Therefore, I’m taking the easy way out this morning, by simply linking to some stuff I find interesting:

Wired magazine has an interview with Megan Prelinger about her new book that features 70’s aerospace company advertisements and some musings on the space program.

The Sydney Morning Herald has a retrospective on the Oscars from an Australian point of view. Suitably disdainful of Avatar, particularly my favorite line – “Avatar is just million-dollar bubblegum.”. I think the author knows where from he speaks, considering that he gives accolades to Lawrence of Arabia, John Ford and Citizen kane.

Speaking of the Oscars: after compiling all of the genre winners and nominees from the multiplicity of award categories (which I’ll probably post tomorrow) it occurs to me that the perception of genre film is that it is about spectacle rather than story. So long as those who make genre films (which I am kinda/sorta restricting to SF, fantasy and horror) resort to spectacle – or – so long as they allow spectacle to overshadow or even equal story – genre films will continue to be placed into the non-winner category. They’ll continue to win all kinds of technical awards, but will never garner the biggies.

If someone really wants to take a shot at best picture for a genre film, they need to go study the list of nominees and winners, find those common threads, craft a genre story around them and then figure out a way to inject some genre elements without overshadowing the story.

Right. That’s ALL they have to do….

Been re-watching all of the original Outer Limits episodes, in broadcast order, of late. So far I’ve been through – The Galaxy Being, The Hundred Days of the Dragon, The Architects of Fear and The Man With the Power. Next up is The Sixth Finger.

I’m planning on writing up some retro-reviews of each issue. I strongly suspect that those of us who are comfortable with B&W television will happily reminisce, while those who don’t understand the use of visual metaphor or think that everything has to be shown and in color (in other words, the latter generations who’ve grown up with stunted imaginative faculties) will find most of it a bore.

Three things that I have noticed so far (and something I wish someone could do a controlled study of) are: the sometimes heavy (but appropriate) use of visual metaphor as a very informative/supportive element of the story: for example, in The Man With The Power, Donald Pleasance plays a milquetoasty kinda guy who has finally managed to break out of his servile, subservient existence. His wife is a shrew who seems to delight in belittling him. One the day that Donald learns that he has been hired to work on the big space program, he happily informs his wife, who is trimming the hedges with a large set of garden sheers. She doesn’t believe him, continuously denigrates him and undercuts his ambitions. All the while, the camera begins a slow tracking shot of the hedges and the sheers, steadily tightening in; the final shot before the cut is of the sheers lopping off one last branch that is sticking up above all the rest.

I wonder if audiences these days are educated enough in this kind of nuanced story telling to even be able to recognize it for what it is.

Another thing I’ve noticed (and have mentioned before) is the use of light and shadow. B&W couldn’t use color (duh) so the masters quickly perfected ways to use light and its absence to wonderful effect. Again, this is a sub-texty kind of thing that adds to the mood, informs and expands the dialogue of the story without having to spend additional time: the shot is framed, the shadows and highlights arranged and presented. If you’re not familiar with this kind of thing, you’ll miss it entirely and you’ll be missing a part of the story.

Finally, early television shows (and movies) were very good at NOT showing you everything. The Architects of Fear offers a perfect example: the thing in the cage. It makes very strange noises. The expressions on the faces of those who are discussing it reflect horror, distaste, a gut-wrenching sickness. When it is finally revealed, all the audience is show is a shadow on the wall.

I know that younger audiences want to actually see it. I know that they’ll be disappointed by not getting to see it. After all, CGI can show us anything. What they are missing by seeing it though is the individual, customized horror that would be created within their own minds by not getting to see it.

These three elements when removed from the viewers experience (through lack of practice or atrophied powers of imagination) strip the story of layers of feeling. It would be like watching the motion capture against green screen version of a modern movie. Sure you’ve got story and action and dialogue, but the underpinnings that generate the visceral emotional reactions to the same are gone.

I strongly suspect that the above is the reason why newer fans often show such disdain for the older shows. Sure some of the science is hokey and certainly some of the cultural sensibilities have changed dramatically, but I think those could be overcome if the viewer actually knew HOW to watch these shows.

Seems kinda strange to be rooting against a genre film, but I absolutely didn’t want to see the ripped-off makes-me-wanna-tear-my-eyeballs-outta-my-head-with-a-rusty-spoon drek that is Avatar obtain the crown of first SF film to win the Best Picture award.

Maybe Cameron will get the hint (but I doubt it).

Irony (not really) that it did win some technical awards.  True irony?  Star Trek gets the makeup award for forehead aliens!  (About the only thing that itreally ought to have gotten an award for – yet another piece of re-tooled sci fi dreck.  Avatar and ST reboot belong in the same no award box).

District 9 got dissed, yeah, too bad on that.  So did Moon (big time) – but at least we won’t have to suffer the association of “SF” with Avatar  as the ‘greatest sci fi flick of all time!” (thank fucking god for that one!!!)

How much ya wanna bet Harlan (if he paid attention last nite) got a nice little crooked smile across his face and muttered serves ya right pal?

From the even stranger department?  What’s all this lamenting that an “SF” film has never won an Academy award?

Back in 1956, Around The World In 80 Days took best picture. Does anyone need a reminder that the movie (with David Niven) was based on the novel by JULES VERNE?  and that the novel itself was just as much a speculative fiction of speculative technologies when written as 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was?

The genre’s already broken the best picture cherry and for some reason we’re all trying to hide it like a not-so-blushing bride who doesn’t really deserve to be wearing a white  dress at the wedding. (Apologies for the old-world sensibilities in that analogy, but it’s really apt:  for some reason we’re treating a genre win like a father trying to get the best dowry price he can as he misrepresents the goods.  Who’s got the lambs blood?  Who’s got the sheets?  Sorry buddy, the groom you’re trying to bamboozle is the very same one who stole the forbidden fruit – you’re not pulling the bridal sheets over his head.  I guess the apologies were premature….)

Some of you may chime in with – what about LOTR’s win? – but really – that was a fantasy flick; if your genre definitions are as loose as our previously mentioned non-virginal bride’s morals are, it just might quality. Me – I’m pure as the driven snow (so long as a plow hasn’t been piling it up).  LOTR qualifies as a “genre” win (of which there have been, ummm, two?) but not as an SF win, nor even a SciFi win.

So it goes.  Good riddance to Avatar.  You deserved better District 9, and so did you Moon.

Check out the list of nominees and winners below:

1937 Lost Horizon
1939 The Wizard of Oz
1950 King Solomon’s Mines
1956 Around The World In 80 Days WINNER
1964 Dr. Strangelove
1967 Dr. Doolittle
1971 A Clockwork Orange
1974 The Towering Inferno
1975 Jaws
1977 Star Wars
1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark
1982 E.T. The Extraterrestrial
1990 Ghost
1991 Beauty and the Beast
1999 The Sixth Sense
2001 The Lord of the Rings – Fellowship
2002 The Lord of the Rings – Two Towers
2003 The Lord of the Rings – Return – winner
2008 The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
2009 Avatar
2009 District 9

The piece is pretty standard fair, but where this thing really shines is in the comments: if you want to find an audience that is pretty hard core classic SF oriented and one that can put up a pretty darned good ‘Asimov to Zelazny’ reading list, you need look no further than the nearly 500 comments that have accumulated so far.

Yes, there are the occasional bombs thrown in (this sucks, that sucks, all SF sucks; fantasy is taking over; this particular author sucks; this particular author used to be good but now that I’ve re-read it, they suck; Heinlein was a fascist; Asimov is boring; the stories concentrate on things, not people; Dune series sucked after the 2nd/3rd/4th/5th/6th… novel; Niven is a fascist; Card is a homophobe (true enough – and remember not to spend a dime on his crap); LeGuin, Butler, Norton Rand are all mentioned copiously, so those looking for gender fail can calm down a bit) – (and the preceding pretty much covers the negativity, so you need not bother with any of the negative comments and can enjoy the positive) – but the responses seem to be largely from those who I might expect to find standing in the hallway at a convention.

I’ve signed up to be able to comment, but KOS has a 24 hour grace period built in, so I’ll satisfy myself by mentioning here that I would have been the first to mention Eric Frank Russell as someone to check out (I was hoping to be able to add Cordwainer Smith, which hope held out until almost the end, but no biggie, I got almost as much satisfaction in seeing that someone else mentioned him, and an equal amount of satisfaction in seeing that someone mentioned H. Beam Piper).

Looks to be a pretty good classically oriented SF fan crowd over there. You might want to check it out.

Anyone else out there writing business plans?  If so, you know what a headache it can be.  Spreadsheets, resumes, competitor analysis, marketing plans…just typing those things is making my fingers AND ears bleed.

Important stuff, but unfortunately not entirely unlike college English class thesis.  Lot’s and lots of high quality bullshit.  What’s that expression about polishing turds?

Yep, 73 pages of unadulterated, high quality, gold-plated, verifiable bs.

Now in its twelfth “final” draft.

Later.

Yes, I did just use Sci Fi – but there’s nothing wrong. I haven’t gone over to the dark side and my brain has not been taken over by Kahn’s earwigs (to reference two sci fi flicks). I’m using the abbreviation in its proper form as a way to signify that what follows next will be a discussion of dreck. Whale crap. Bull puckey. The ass end of Sturgeon’s equation.

I just read Peter Sagal’s piece about Avatar over on the AMC movie blog, where I am happy to say that I managed to make the first comment. That means that anyone else desiring of commentary will most likely read what I’ve said and, while they may take strong exception to it, at least they’ll have been exposed to my argument.

What set me off was this brief, dismissive and throw-away statement:

“Cameron’s stripped-down scenario (yes, we know he stole it from Harlan Ellison) allowed him to concentrate his minimal FX budget on shots of the future and on Stan Winston’s stop-motion robot skeleton. He was like Reese: improvising with whatever cars, guns, and fires he could find, in the Los Angeles of 1984. The result inspired many sci-fi directors to take a grittier, more blood-and-bones approach than they had before.”

Have we become so inured to outright theft that we are easily able to overlook it in favor of the “good things” that resulted?

Sagal’s piece discusses how we might never have been given Avatar if it hadn’t been for Cameron’s luck in obtaining Schwarzenegger’s services as the bad guy.

Some luck. Aren’t we oh so fortunate to have been exposed to a film that is dragging along behind it a ton of accusations suggesting that Cameron has used the same skill and luck (theft) to create it?  (Strugatsky’s Noon Universe series where the planet is named Pandora, takes place in the same time period and features tall, blue aliens named the Nav, who inhabit a lush jungle world).

Sturgatsky may not be interested in suing, but given Cameron’s admitted ‘borrowing’ of Ellison’s Outer Limits scripts and similar accusations regarding Titanic, I really think that it suggests a modus operandi on the part of “the award winning director” (who’s also been accused of making block busters with god-awful scripts:  can’t write?  steal!)

Why so hepped up ab0ut this?  Pushes my buttons, that’s why.  I get so sick an tired of seeing those who live by the adage “better to apologize later than ask for permission first”) receiving the accolades and getting the dollars that let them cement their position behind a wall of obfuscation (why is Avatar so big?  Maybe it has more to do with the incessent hype than it does with quality.  Got hundreds of millions – go buy yourself an audience!)

And it pisses me off even more to see folks like Sagal gloss over the whole thing.  If we lived in a better world, Cameron would never again have been allowed near a camera after the Ellison battle – and the audience would be roundly rejecting anything he put in theaters as being suspect and tarred.

But instead we get ‘avatars’ of real films.

#

From the don’t even get me started department:  Roland Emmerich has ‘promised that he won’t ruin the adaptation of Isaac Asimov’s Foundation trilogy.  You can read the details over on Slice of SciFi.

I agree with the folks over there:  given what’s been publicly disclosed, there is no fucking way that movie is going to do any justice to Ike’s series.  Someone needs to start a recall of this film now.

The novel features a different version of the 2010 Superbowl – a game in which the rules have been slightly changed from those we’re familiar with.

For .99 cents you can’t pass this one up. Gary has a very playful style that nevertheless manages to sneak in a gritty, real-world noirish feel, and he is a master of genre tropes and the invocation of that slippery sensuwunda. (See the Vulture review for a deeper explanation of such.)

I’ve started reading it and am already captivated, this, despite the fact that that it is already 2010 and Killerbowl is not a reality – unless you want to consider paintball the real world substitute. For more on that connection, check out my coverage of the book over at the paintball website