tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8574849798016702872024-03-19T06:50:32.049-04:00Cosmic CinemaCosmic Cinema is dedicated to Science Fiction and Fantasy movies be they big budget Hollywood blockbusters, obscure B-movies, or bargain basement mock busters.Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.comBlogger91125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-32870542742995419812009-08-24T16:17:00.002-04:002009-08-24T16:31:03.948-04:00Dealing with MSN as an ISP and their Tech Support<p align="center">And 10 Things I've Learned after 2+ Weeks of Updates gone Wrong and a day Wasted Waiting on hold between being shunted from one Call Center to the next.<br /></p><p align="center">Or<br /></p><p align="center">Lamentations of a Man who Thought the Problem had been Fixed.</p><br /><br /><p>1. Tech support is a misnomer. Tech savvy they're not (9 times out of 10).</p><p>2. You can never get a straight answer but will learn to either endure their "agents" (when did "operators" go out of style?) trouble shooting "checklist" or defenestrate your phone.</p><p>3. MSN as an ISP when it comes to "update" time means one hour/day you can connect, the next you can't; just as one hour/day when you call tech support you're assured your OS is supported but the next day/hour you're told it isn't and you should upgrade to VISTA/ XP/ whatevah. (see #2)</p><p>4. It takes 1-5 minutes to actually get passed the stupid automated call center, whether you try to annunciate clearly or not doesn't matter. You can recite poetry, play heavy metal, put the phone down and watch paint dry, you just have to endure those 1-5 minutes until the automated call center forwards you to the live call center.</p><p>5. While waiting to be forwarded to the next live "agent" you'll be inundated with canned info blurbs (spoken by a woman that sounds suspiciously like Demi Moore) informing you that all your problems can be fixed online. 'Did you know. .' the voice will begin, and repeat over and over and over as MSN rapes your ear hole with nonsense you couldn't care less about.</p><p>6. It takes a minimum of 1-5 minutes to give the people in the live call center your information before they'll actually TALK to you about why you're calling.</p><p>7. It will take 5-10 minutes of explaining your problem to the "tech support" people before they forward you to a "specialist", who you'll have to explain everything to all over again.</p><p>8. If you call "after hours" (meaning anytime after 12 noon EST) your call has a 50/50 chance of going to a call center where everyone has Indian or Pakistani accents. (The chance goes up to 100% after 5-7 o'clock EST.)</p><p>9. People with strange accents that may or may not be in a call center in India or Pakistan do not comprehend "M-E" as a operating system, but if you tell them "millennium" (and give them a minute or three to put you on hold while they consult their call center manual) may recognize it as a OS that Miscosoft has tossed into the dung heap, along with anyone still unfortunate enough to have a machine running it. (Don't laugh. It was okay as an crappy iMachine for internet usage, until a couple weeks ago.)</p><p>9. When dealing with call center people with the hard to place accents no matter how many times you explain simple concepts, like explaining what your OS is or your current browser version, they'll stick to their "check list" and never quite grasp that "I'm on DIAL-UP" means you can't A) connect while you are talking to them, B) are calling them because you can't connect thus you can't DOWNLOAD updates, and; C) if you're lucky their trouble shooting "fixes" don't do anything to make your problem worse. If you're lucky.</p><p>10. When the tech support guy with the funny foreign accent says all you need is to upgrade to the most current version of the proprietary browser software and everything will be fixed; it'll only make the problem worse. (As in NOTHING WORKS after.)</p><p>11. Finally- yes, like Spinal Tap, I can't count too well- it took one heck of a talk, explaining re-explaining, questioning with confused frustration, for someone to finally hem and haw around the truth, which I suspected all along (despite being told otherwise in what amounts to bold faced lies): My OS is NOT supported. Microsoft has apparently (I'm guessing; see #2 above) instituted a new 'framework' update designed to cut off all OSes older than XP and Vista. Why I couldn't have been told this 2+ weeks ago is beyond me. My best guess is MSN wanted to get one more month of FEES out of me. I am not amused. I am not a happy camper. I will NOT be continuing with MSN. Where I'll end up, with whom, or if I'll be back any time soon only the Fates can augur.</p><p># end</p><p>P.S. I knew I shouldn't have posted that message about eugenics and the apocalypse. ;-)</p><p>Expect me when you see me my friends!<br /></p><p>L8r!</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-35258822475607678502009-08-23T17:54:00.005-04:002009-08-23T18:45:36.805-04:00Eugenics, Movies, and the Apocalypse<p>Since I last posted here I've more or less stabilized my connection, found a ex-rental VHS of the post-apocalypse rarity, THE AFTERMATH, and watched in utter disbelief the cable news networks. But first THE AFTERMATH. I've never seen it and have been looking for a copy for sometime. I could string together a googolplex of adjectives to tell you how bad that flick is but, suffice to say, it's not worth the money I paid for it. So I wont be wasting space talking about it here.</p><p>Instead I'm going to talk about current events, in a science fiction context, since "real life" seems to have taken a turn down surreal street. (At least on certain cable news shows.) I have noticed, as undoubtedly have many others, that depending on which cable news network happens to be on, America seems to be falling apart at the seams-- Only the why's and what fore's seem to vary. According to certain of the talking heads people are taking to the streets in protest, even carrying guns, and the sky is about to come crashing down as the Obama regime is about to institute a form of eugenics that will kill grandma, blot the sun out of the sky, and make Satan seem like a jolly fat man in a red suit yadayadahohoho. All this while yet other talking heads say it's all fabricated Astroturf nonsense.</p><p>And then there's the talk/discussion/shouting matches about healthcare, death panels, progressives, Nazi's, and yet more talk about eugenics.</p><p>This talk of eugenics got me thinking. The concept has been around for a long time. It was practiced in ancient Sparta, where it really was state enforced. The basic idea is a simple one, if a bit convoluted, depending on who happens to be trying to explain it at the time. Being a fan of science fiction, wherein eugenics has been explored in both it's pros and cons for decades (it's even a central theme in the back story of Star Trek), I find some of the current discussions about eugenics by political pundits rather funny; and woefully uninformed. Thus I've decided to provide a public service announcement, of sorts, by going to one of the sources and quoting a/the turn of the century author that wrote about this 'science' and letting you, the reader, using the author's own words, see what the concepts behind eugenics are/is. So read, think, and judge for yourself. I'm just a guy that writes reviews.</p><p>We'll begin by quoting from APPLIED EUGENICS by Paul Popenoe, originally published circa 1918 (Full text here: <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19560"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19560</u></span></a>) ::</p><p>"Eugenics consists of a foundation of biology and a superstructure of sociology" designed to produce a "practical means by which society may encourage the reproduction of superior persons and discourage that of inferiors" therefore "it is desirable to discriminate as much as possible" in favor of those individuals bearing traits considered positive for the betterment of the state and society.</p><p>How is this to be accomplished?</p><p>Ideally the goal of "eugenics is to make such legal, social and economic adjustments that (1) a larger proportion of superior persons will have children than at present, (2) that the average number of offspring of each superior person will be greater than at present, (3) that the most inferior persons will have no children, and finally that (4) other inferior persons will have fewer children than now."</p><p>One may wonder how such ideas came into being. As the author states in his introduction:</p><p>"The Great War has caused a vast destruction of the sounder portion of the belligerent peoples and it is certain that in the next generation the progeny of their weaker members will constitute a much larger proportion of the whole than would have been the case if the War had not occurred. Owing to this immeasurable calamity that has befallen the white race, the question of eugenics has ceased to be merely academic."</p><p>In otherwords the author is worried about the potential decline of "the more valuable stocks" of humanity. One may ask what these "more valuable stocks" of humanity are, who decides, and to what ultimate purpose? Interestingly the author provides a answer to this quandry as well as the means whereby the above may be instituted:</p><p>"The fear of racial decline provides the eugenist with a far stronger leverage than did the hope of accelerating racial progress."</p><p>Racial decline of whom? Why the "white race" course! (see above) So this "racial progress" is designed to "inspire the superior to rise above certain worldly ideals of life and to aim at a family success rather than an individual success." Sounds fair enough. After all politicians are aways waxing poetic about family values. There's nothing sinister about family values, is there? Such a plan as this might provide "methods . . . by which . . . the people of America might be made, on the average, healthier, happier, and more efficient."</p><p>What could possibly be wrong with that?</p><p>Guess it depends on who you are and whether you belong to one of the ethnic groups deemed to belong to the "valuable stocks" of humanity.</p><p>Sounds like crazy science fiction, right? Maybe not. Some of these thematic elements have been touched upon in recent movies like <a href="http://www.depauw.edu/SFs/essays/gattaca.htm"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">GATTACA</u></span></a> and <a href="http://cinemastyles.blogspot.com/2009/08/history-and-movies-eugenics-and-dumbing.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">IDIOCRACY</u></span></a> (though as an unintentional satire of the concept) but they're far from crazy. The idea of eugenics, though the term itself has fallen into disuse due primarily to the excesses of the Nazi regime in it's applications of eugenics in practice, remains a very real social engineering construct. It's not merely some crackpot theory, nor is it limited to the Nazi's, who merely borrowed it as they did so much else. However, where science fiction is concerned, perhaps the best serious example of eugenics at work can be found in Frank Herbert's <a href="http://neilmcallister.com/2007/09/17/dune/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">DUNE</u></span></a>.</p><p>The Bene Gesserit sisterhood are essentially eugenicists caught up in a centuries long breeding program working for a singular goal; the creation of a Kwisatz Haderach, or superhuman. Of course Paul Atreides wasn't exactly part of the plan. His mother wasn't supposed to have sons. Which makes one wonder what the outcome of the Bene Gesserit program would have been. A Khan Noonian Singh perhaps?</p><p>(to be continued)</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-329540432113436382009-08-10T12:04:00.001-04:002009-08-10T12:09:28.547-04:00Word of Warning RE: the Microsoft NetworkGoodbye Again Friends,<br /><br />Something is fishy in Denmark.<br /><br />I can but can not access the internet. My machine has been experiencing some very odd behavior that I feel anyone using a PC should be made aware of. Obviously right now I am online, as I have posted this, but to do so I am forced to reset my security settings so low that any of those invasive malware programs that do not exist in MSN's browser software et al have free access to whatever servers they do not connect to from my system. This is unacceptable. And I'm more than a bit miffed at the situation, which I shall outline in more detail below.<br /><br />Long story short Microsoft (as I previously mentioned they are my Internet provider) somehow got through my firewall and installed something on my system that I never gave permission for them to do. Considering I do not use their MSN Browser, instead preferring the simplicity of logging in via IE or Firefox, my initial discovery of an inability to log in had me calling tech support. Despite assurances that all I needed was the newest version of the MSN Browser and everything would be fine once I downloaded it- which is a load of BS but then that's the problem with outsourcing to foreign countries, these people don't speak English as a first language and thus are incapable of comprehending simple facts spoken to them in simple terms like: I'VE TRIED TO UPDATE AND AM UNABLE BECAUSE I GET MESSAGES SAYING MY OS IS NO LONGER SUPPORTED. They keep insisting. So all you can do is let them feed you their line of BS and hope.<br /><br />But that's not what really annoyed me. What annoyed me is discovering, after a bit of kludging around, that Microsoft managed to hack past my firewall and install something on my computer. Let me repeat that. . . My service provider, the people who take my money every month, appear to have hacked into my system to force an "update" on my machine that effectively CRIPPLES my ability to access the service they are taking my money for.<br /><br />I could be paranoid but the facts seem to support the theory that a forced "update" was executed on my machine to disable it. My first clue, as I may have mentioned in my earlier post, was noticing something trying to load on my system. It was attempting to force, I thought, a shockwave update. Now I've never figured out how to block these. These updates circumvent my firewall, actually they don't even register they just seem to start and my only clue is everything suddenly slowing down to a crawl. I've observed this many times, usually only during those few times I am forced to lower my security settings. Thus my only, and best, defense against them has been to surf the net with my security settings set to high. Alas when you log in to check e-mail and such you have NO CHOICE but to compromise your system and lower your security settings. My best guess is Microsoft used one of these times to hack into my system.<br /><br />Now "hack" may seem like a harsh word to use. But read on.<br /><br />Long story short a program downloaded onto my system in the Shockwave directory a few weeks ago. I discovered it was there because it was loading during boot-up and instantly attempting to access the internet. The only reason I was aware of this is because I have dial-up and have my system set up to manually dial in, thus the dialogue box for dialing out kept popping up for no reason. Took me a while to figure out what the problem was. What I had to do was manually find and delete this mystery file, including it's registry key. I forget exactly what it was called but I think it was something like POSTUPDATE.EXE. Shortly thereafter my problems began. Obviously I did not find and remove this invasive program in time.<br /><br />Currently there is a way for me to access the Internet, but it's round about. Considering this is a paid for service which is suddenly being denied with absolutely NO forewarning AND my IP installed something on my system without my consent I find this disturbing. I am NOT a happy customer.<br /><br />For those thinking this is a overreaction consider this: There is a program that now wants to run on my system: LOADQM.EXE. This is an important fact because I stopped using MSN Browser because it had too many programs wanting open ports through my software firewall. (And I don't use IM.) Now the most invasive of these programs, one which I PHYSICALLY REMOVED FROM IT'S DIRECTORY AND PLACED IN A ZIP ARCHIVE was, you guessed it, LOADQM.EXE.<br /><br />So since I removed this program it shouldn't be running on my system. So how did it get back ON my system? Remember my OS is no longer supported. That means no updates. If I can't update then how did this program get back on my system? I do not know.<br /><br />Nor do I know what the purpose of this program is. I do know it kept crashing my system and giving me blue screens as it was constantly trying to worm it's way through my firewall, despite me denying it access, which was why I removed it. Yet now it's back on my system. It is, I think disabled again. And, surprise surprise, that seems to be what was slowing everything down. Was it because it was forcing ports open through my firewall and doing. . . Something?<br /><br />Again I do not know. According to Google this is a program associated with IM. But that' a load of BS. IM is non-functional on my machine. I do not use IM. But even if I did IM appears to currently be disabled. Besides the information I can find claims it's some sort of auto-updater, again BS as my OS is no longer supported. A fact Microsoft seemed intent on driving home to me by crippling my system. Which makes me wonder what other invasive programs they might have placed on my machine, all while CONTINUING TO TAKE MY MONEY for a service they seem to not want to provide to those of us using older OS platforms.<br /><br />What's up with that? I paid good money for this computer and the software that came with it, brand new I might add. The OS has never really worked. Has Microsoft ever apologized for releasing barely functional OSes that crash over 50% of the time? Issued a single rebate? Used any of the information that we are forced to provide them to contact us, the people they ghettoize as "end users" to help us in any way? No.<br /><br />They take our money then, when you try to set up YOUR OWN PROPERTY to be as secure as possible they hack into it to install a backdoor to CRIPPLE it because they decided that it's time for you to upgrade to the newest flavor of barely functional OS? Am I the only one that has a problem with these heavy handed tactics?<br /><br />Honestly if not for the fact I kind of sort of need my e-mail addy I'd have canceled this service in a heartbeat. Probably will. In the meantime look to your own systems. Be sure that your service providers haven't installed something nefarious on your machine.<br /><br />Kind Regards,<br /><br />Kester PelagiusKester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-79365098384045184942009-08-07T20:53:00.002-04:002009-08-07T21:09:54.799-04:00Forced Hiatus LoomingGreetings Loyal Readers,<br /><br />Everything seemed to be working, if not perfectly fine, at least passably so earlier today. Then, wham, nothing wanted to work. Long story short after placing a call to tech support it appears that the Microsoft Network (my service provider) in their finite wisdom have decreed that all those whose computers aren't up to their specs and using the most up-to-date version of their malwa- koff- sorry, their web surfing software shall NOT be allowed to connect to the web. At least until they upgrade. Funny. They take my money for the service yet don't bother to give a guy a heads up, send me upgrade discs, or anything. I mean is it too much to ask for a heads up that your service provider is about to cut their entire network off from those using older versions of their software? What's up with that? Is it because I'm using older software and thus I don't matter to them?<br /><br />Oh, sure, according to the tech support guy I apparently was informed, via e-mail. You know some of us don't check e-mail every day. And when we do it's usually so full of spam that gets past the filter we spend most of our time trying to weed through the chaff. But, hey, according to the tech support person, who sounded like he was from India or Pakistan (or wherever Miscrosoft outs ources to) I WAS informed. So far be it from me to dispute such lofty facts. Not that I tried. Before I could the tech guy informed me I probably deleted the e-mail by accident. Yeah, okay, whatever.<br /><br />Long story short Internet Explorer (the browser I was using to log in with as I despise the invasiveness of the MSN browser) no longer logs me in. I'd been noticing something trying to eat up my bandwidth for the past couple of days. I thought it was Shockwave trying to force an update but, apparently, it was MSN updating something to force me to go out and buy a new PC. Bass turds!<br /><br />*waves impotent fist at nobody in particular*<br /><br />Not really sure what sort of PC to get. Don't really want to buy a new one but it'd probably be cheaper than updating the OS on this machine. I'm not saying that if I saw Bill Gates on fire in the middle of the street that I wouldn't urinate on him, but this entire concept of corporations not just foisting new software onto you whether you like it or not but forcing you to upgrade ad nauseum ad infinitum is exhausting.<br /><br />But I suppose those poor execs at MSN need more money to feed their pet bald eagles, or whatever. So I guess you can expect to see new reviews when you see them. Sorry about that. Ain't much a guy can do when their service provider cold cocks them. Everything is slow as molasses, but I'm not going to tell you the odd manner in which I managed to connect lest someone at MSN be reading this and close that hole up too. But, suffice it so say, it makes surfing the web even slower than usual.<br /><br />Sigh. Well it's be grand fun. Hope to have (and be able to post) new reviews for you soon.<br /><br /><br />Kind Regards,<br /><br />Kester PelagiusKester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-16801867382732918102009-08-05T19:36:00.003-04:002009-08-05T19:49:06.081-04:00Of Hercules, Giant Robots, and Reviews<p>Having recently purchased the double feature of Hercules/Adventure of Hercules for the princely sum of $3 at a Big Lots I was working on a review of both movies. But, try as I might, the second movie is a brain freeze. I find myself pausing the movie, noting the time on the counter, then ejecting the disc. Why? Because it's offal! That's not a typo, it's really awful beyond words. I've not been able to bring myself to watch it all the way through. Alas haste makes waste and the early bird gets the worm, or in the case writes the review.</p><p>A wise [expletive deleted] once said that "great minds think alike" and a recent discovery of a review at <a href="http://www.blackgate.com/">Black Gate</a> for Lou Ferrigno's Hercules (posted yesterday no less) would seem to prove that axiom. I was working on a review to post here but after reading Mr. Ryan's review mine now seems superfluous. He not only quotes from the same Starlog article- possibly found online at the same site I found it?- but makes a lot of the same or similar points I was/might have so I'm tabling my review.</p><p>That said I'd like to now direct you to the fine article <a href="http://www.blackgate.com/2009/08/04/hercules-vs-the-giant-robots/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Hercules vs. the Giant Robots</u></span></a></p><p>Kudos to the reviewer. Very well written sir.</p><p># End of Line</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-62312760073450831592009-07-30T19:58:00.007-04:002009-07-30T21:09:07.336-04:00Areola 51<p><center><img height="307" alt="Title" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2444/3772870469_e4e791105d_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><b><p>Year:</b> 2007</p><b><p>Director:</b> Eddie Edwards</p><b><p>Format Viewed:</b> Satellite Broadcast</p><b><p>Cast:</b> Molinee Green, Nicole Oring, Valentine Snow, Deborah Wise, Jessica Sweet, et al.</p><b><p>Runtime:</b> 74 min</p><b><p>Rating:</b> TV-MA</p><b><p>Related URLs:</b> <a href="http://www.collierlandry.com/a51trailer.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Trailer</u></span></a> (NSFW)</p><p>As astute readers will have already surmised Areola 51 is one of those low budget "late night" movies that cable channels like skinemax apparently have an endless supply of. Why review it? Partly because at the time I am writing this there is virtually no information to be found online and partly because, even though it is a late night T&A flick, it is technically SF and has some VFX that actually look better than the typical Sci-Fi; sorry, SyFylys Channel; original movie. I feel that makes it worth commenting on. The things I endure for the love of the genre and for this site.</p><br /><br /><p align="center"><span style="font-family:verdana;font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">* * * WARNING * * *</span></p><p><span style="color:#3333ff;">Don't continue reading BEYOND THIS POINT unless you're interested in hawt sci-fi babes. There may be NSFW content beyond this point. I do not guarantee there will be but there might and I don’t want you getting in trouble with your boss (or whoever).</span><br /></p><p align="center"><span style="font-family:verdana;font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">* * * WARNING * * *</span></p><p><b>Premise:</b> Alien space babes come to earth to research human sexuality, abduct a sexually frustrated secretary, and probe her for data.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Abduction" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2440/3773679180_e62cb932ef_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><b><p>The Reality:</b> Threadbare plot is used as an excuse to film soft core vignettes.</p><b><p>The Story:</b> Areola 51 is a UFO themed alien abduction spoof starring a bevy of bountiful buff babes. Some are porn starlets and actresses from late night erotic series like Co-ed Confidential. Thus some may be asking the question: Is a more explicit version of this movie available? The short answer is I do not know. So far as I can tell this has not been released to DVD. However given the fact Areola 51 is presented as a series of vignettes linked by a framing narrative device of a woman being interrogated by a shadowy man in black type. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Interrogation" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3515/3773680466_a4dc2da42b_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>With the vignettes revealed as flashbacks. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Sample of the VFX" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2648/3773681708_58fbe94230_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>And revealing quite a lot of naked skin (while adding nothing to the threadbare plot or narrative). .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Shower scene teaser pic" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2438/3773682938_3cd5970173_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>It's possible more was shot than made it into this cable version or that some scenes may have been recycled from previous adult features. (If you were involved with this production or know anything about this movie send me an e-mail or leave a comment and I'll update this review accordingly.) If how much naked skin is in a movie is what most interests you I suggest renting something else. Areola 51 attempts to do what so many similar softcore movies before it has, take the "adult" movie formula and meld it with drama; albeit with less than stellar results. But it's at least more interesting than the usual vacuous nonsense storylines found in these latenight skinemax flicks. An effort was made to make this SF. I wouldn't review it otherwise.</p><b><p>Assessment:</b> This movie is deadly dull boring. The first time I tried to sit through it I was initially intrigued by the VFX. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="flying saucer" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2537/3772877353_1125426f7c_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Which don't look all that impressive in a screen cap. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="VFX shot" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2585/3773685666_f8442cd6a5_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>For those asking: Is this really worth watching in the first place? I say. .</p><b><p>Verdict:</b> There is a reason there's not many reviews to be found online for this. Aside from the mélange of soft core cut scenes Areola 51 is an epic snooze fest. Basically the producers took an idea better suited to a 30 minute Twilight Zone style episode and padded it out to near feature length. The easy out would be to say no one expects much of a late night skinemax movie. That's a steaming load. Upon a second viewing I found the movie to not only have moments of absurd hilarity but to have competent, if fleeting, VFX. Sadly Areola 51 never rises above being a limp DTV flick trapped within its formulaic late night T&A prison. If not for the fact I'd decided to record the movie and write a review of it before I'd ever seen it I may not have given Areola 51 a second look. Honesty compells me to note that, aside from an energetic piece of music used during the VFX laden title scroll and an abduction sequence with interesting visuals. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Examining the abductee" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2602/3772879795_9a91d02995_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>The movie is deceptively blasé in it's approach to using it's SF thematic elements. Had their been any action to provide forward momentum it might have mitigated the tedium. Alas what Areola 51 attempts to do is take the Scherhazade approach to storytelling and turn it into a "let's tell repetitive stories to an captive audience" as the excuse to show simulated "sex scenes" in the usual clichéd softcore approach of opus filmmaking. The producers likely assumed all would be forgiven because of the gratuitous nudity. They were wrong.</p><p>However I am willing to take into account that this appears to be the production company's first feature, at least this is it's first listed credit at IMDB. To the producers I would say Areola 51 would be interesting as an uncensored Twilight Zone episode but, as a feature, sadly lacks scope. I hate to say that because the technical execution showed promise. If the production company produces more SF movies and infuses them with a little more action, retains the gratuitous nudity (perhaps with a little more narrative justification for it's presence), while incorporating more VFX and music (there's just the one song) I'd definitely tune in to watch them. Heck I might even buy a few of their titles on DVD, assuming they ever get DVD releases.</p><p>So if you like hawt sci-fi babes then set your TiVO to record this! Otherwise I'd recommend it only for hardcore bad movie masochists and people too embarrassed to buy real porn.</p><p># End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-61724627263516391092009-07-27T01:20:00.001-04:002009-07-27T01:20:00.516-04:00Have you heard the HK & Cult Film News?<p>Today Cosmic Cinema is continuing to look around the net and report on interesting review sites. Last week we showcased <a href="http://beardedweirdoreviews.blogspot.com/">Weirded Beardo Reviews</a>, or some such [wink], today it's <a href="http://hkfilmnews.blogspot.com/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">HK & Cult Film News</u></span></a>. If you're thinking that's a rather odd niche for a reviewer to choose and that such a site must be deathly dull boring to anyone not interested in Hong Kong movies you'd be. . . WRONG!</p><p>This site has actually reviewed quite a range of genre flicks. Apparently "cult" is broadly defined here. Which is good news for heroic fantasy fans as the DVD release of a relatively recent Sci-Fi channel original movie was recently reviewed. It was even praised as an "modest but well-crafted" movie that "manages to rise a bit above the mediocrity of the usual Sci-Fi Channel fare."</p><p>Which movie gets such praise? Why it's none other than <a href="http://hkfilmnews.blogspot.com/2009/07/merlin-and-book-of-beasts-dvd-review-by.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">MERLIN AND THE BOOK OF BEASTS</u></span></a>. A movie that, sadly, I missed entirely. Wish I could say the same for KNIGHTS OF BLOODSTEEL, a similarly themed heroic fantasy syfylys flick which was so bad I actually steered clear of syfylys channel original movies for a while. The review is not exactly glowing but it's earnest and honest in it's critique.</p><p>Viz. "Production values remain modest but decent enough otherwise, although the most the filmmakers manage in the way of interiors are a few rooms in the Arkadian's palace and some tunnels. A small courtyard set with a couple dozen extras is all we see of Camelot's inhabitants. Overall, the production design and cinematography are good and the film, while sparsely populated, has an attractive look."</p><p>Sadly this title is currently on sale at Amazon dot com for about 18 bucks, marked down from 20, and I have to say that there isn't a syfylys movie made that's worth that kind of scratch. There's just so many ways to spend 20 bucks. Alas using it to buy a syfylys movie is a waste. I'd sooner take a 20, pour lighter fluid on it, and burn it. Maybe if syfylys weren't so greedy and priced these DVDs modestly, say around 15 dollars to begin with then moving them to the 5 dollar bargain bin, so unless it comes up in the syfylys schedule again I'm going to pass. But read the review and decide for yourself. Sounds like this one might not have been all that bad.</p><p># End of Line</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-28659177727702487112009-07-23T10:21:00.006-04:002009-07-23T10:31:38.929-04:00Have you seen the Bearded Weirdo?<p>His reviews are actually pretty informative, for all that they give the entirety of the plot of most movies he's reviewing away. But then there's two kind of reviewers, those reviewing for people who have yet to see a movie (I count myself amongst this type) and those writing for people who've already seen the movie or who don't give a fig about spoilers. If this is you then you're going to love <a href="http://beardedweirdoreviews.blogspot.com/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Bearded Weirdo Reviews</u></span></a>. Just be advised this site is slightly NSFW. So if that discourages you from checking this site out read no further, because I'm about to talk about some grand fun reviews he's posted recently.</p><p>Still reading? Alrighty then get ready for the awesome!</p><p>In a recent review for <a href="http://beardedweirdoreviews.blogspot.com/2009/06/warrior-sorceress-1984.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">The Warrior & The Sorceress</u></span></a> the Bearded Weirdo had the following nuggets of wisdom to say about the sword-and-sorcery genre:</p><p><span style="font-family:courier new;">"Often, I find, uneducated video renters the world over use the terms 'sword-and-sorcery' and "fantasy" interchangeably. This is a tragic fallacy that must, must, must be corrected."</span></p><p>Mr. Weirdo goes on to explain, at length, the differences between high fantasy and heroic fantasy (the subset of fantasy to which sword-and-sorcery belongs). It's very interesting, even if the commentary gets a bit blue at times. My favorite nugget O'wisdom, at least what I can quote here, is the following:</p><p><span style="font-family:courier new;">"LORD OF THE RINGS is "high fantasy," not "sword-and-sorcery." Period. If a sword-and-sorcery hero ran into Frodo Baggins on some winding forest path in some faraway land of myth and mysticism... he'd beat the ever-loving sh!t out of that wimpy li'l hobbit bastard and steal his most cherished belongings. Then our unnamed savage ravager might go on an arson spree throughout all of The Shire, raping any hobbit ladyfolk he encountered along the way."</span></p><p>That does paint a picture. And what does that have to do with the movie mentioned above? Well you'll just have to read the review (<a href="http://beardedweirdoreviews.blogspot.com/2009/06/warrior-sorceress-1984.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">The Warrior & The Sorceress</u></span></a>) to find out! But the aforementioned review is a dull whitewashed piece of flotsam in comparison to the review for <a href="http://beardedweirdoreviews.blogspot.com/2009/07/demonwarp-1998.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Demonwarp</u></span></a>. You know you're in for something special when a reviewer's opening paragraph is: <b></p></b><b><p><span style="font-family:courier new;">"</span></b><span style="font-family:courier new;">Why the f#@k would you ever go hiking in a place called Demonwood Forest? Seriously. What good could come of that? How could anything else but violent death await you? Have you people not seen any g-dd@mn horror movie, like, ever?"</span></p><p>Lots of expletives in this particular review. But if you can stick with it it's a real experience. Sort of like getting hit in the head with a volley ball at the beach. You're just sitting there minding your business then, out of nowhere, WHAM!</p><p>Alas Bearded Weirdo has not reviewed a lot of sci-fi features. This saddens me. Then again the few he has reviewed are full of his high octane critical wit. Behold what the Weirdo had to say about <a href="http://beardedweirdoreviews.blogspot.com/2009/01/barb-wire-1996.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Barb Wire</u></span></a>:</p><p><span style="font-family:courier new;">"BARB WIRE is the kind of movie that doesn't have a lot of fans who are willing to mention it without using that magic phrase "guilty pleasure" in the same breath. Like I said, I don't get the whole "guilty pleasure" thing, and I don't like it. To me, it's just a cop-out, and it smacks of "denying Jesus three times."<br /><br />Well, Peter may have denied Jesus three times, but you won't soon catch me denying Pam Anderson even once. Not with this kind o' brilliant badness on her resume'."</span></p><p>I've read reviews that compare Barb Wire and Pamela Anderson to a lot of things but I don't think I've ever seen, heard, or imagined either would ever be compared to the life and times of Jesus. To be perfectly honest Barb Wire is a movie I've been meaning to write a review for, one day. I say "one day" because I've never really known where to start with it. Which is funny considering Mr. Weirdo got his review going with a lengthy rant about the absurdity of "guilty pleasures" which led to the following insightful overview of the movie:</p><p><span style="font-family:courier new;">"Inspired by the comic book of the same title, the film is a post-apocalyptic whirligig of bullets, bleached blond hair extensions, and black leather. It opens, like many a Bad-with-a-capital-B futuristic action flick, with a lengthy pre-credits scroll of white text in front of a harsh-looking "scorched earth" landscape that explains that the year is 2017 and America is involved in a second Civil War. Every city in the nation has fallen under an iron-fisted super-authoritarian government rule. Every city, that is, except for Wire's hometown of Steel Harbor <...>"</span></p><p>Nice synopsis. I particularly love the careful and well thought placement of an illustrative pic right next to this paragraph. (You'll just have to take my word for it if clicking the above link to visit a NSFW sight frightens you.) I should point out that <a href="http://beardedweirdoreviews.blogspot.com/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Bearded Weirdo Reviews</u></span></a> doesn't have a lot of movies currently under review. But the select few movies that have been reviewed are thoroughly critiqued. A very unusual and interesting review site. You should check it out soon.</p><p># End of Line</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-34524604500020568142009-07-06T13:29:00.003-04:002009-07-06T13:39:59.420-04:00Gor, Lost in Adaptation or merely Lost? (Fini)<p><center><img height="330" alt="The Movies" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2452/3675306333_20cdc07049_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Adapting novels into screenplays to adapt into movies is a lot like translating an ancient text written in a long dead language. The journey from hieroglyphs to contemporary English, French, or German is arduous. Subtle contexts of meaning often get lost in translation. No matter how fluent the translator may be there is no avoiding this. Witness the atrocious, often unintentionally funny, English dubbing of sword-and-sandal imports or the differences in word choice found in different Bible editions. Of course how well a translation retains the spirit and concepts of the original depends on how faithful the translator stays to the source. Good translations take time, witness the years of work that often go into translating classical works. No two translators present quite the same text for the works of Homer, Plato, or even the Bible.</p><p>A prime example of how a movie differs from the novels on which it is based can be found in the artwork of Gor. It may not be an entirely fair critique to judge a book (series) by it's cover(s) yet we can learn much from them. .</p><p><center><img height="385" alt="detail" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2628/3676129942_b09d5bce83_o.jpg" width="388" /></center><p></p><p>1. Assassin of Gor, artist Boris Valejo; notice one woman is bound in chains and the other is knelling in supplication to the dominant male. 2. Kajira of Gor, artist unknown; the full scene depicts a male fighting some outlandish Gorean beast as a bound female slave looks on. 3. Outlaw of Gor, artist ?; a female is staked out and bound in chains while two men fight over (her) their prize. 4. Now compare to an actual screen cap from the movie GOR, in which a woman is not only lacking bonds she's wielding a sword in defense of her village.</p><p>Obviously, having not read the novels, it's hard to judge whether women wielding swords and being heroic goes totally against the grain of Gor as written. Yet here's another typical quote from a fan site:</p><dir><dir><p>"You!" said the trainer, gesturing to another girl with his Whip. "To his feet! Beg for love!" This girl hurried forward and knelt before Drusus Rencius. "I beg for love, Master," she whispered. "You!" said the trainer, indicating another girl. She, too, hurried forward. She knelt before Drusus Rencius, her palms on the floor, her head to the very tiles. "I beg for love," she whispered. "I beg for love, Master."<br /><br /><b><span style="font-size:100%;">-Kajira of Gor, pg 139</b></span><br /></p></dir></dir><p>Most quotes posted on fan sites seem to be snapshots of slave-master relationships; with females predominantly in the submissive role. Even taken out of context they speak volumes. In the novels women are portrayed as submissive chattels whose role in Gorean society is essentially that of eager sex slave. A golden premise for exploitation filmmakers. Alas the opportunity to create a cult classic on par with The Perils of Gwendoline, The Story of O, Emmanuelle, or the infamous nazisploitation Ilsa trilogy was squandered. Like them or loathe them the Gor novels, and Gorean Fantasy, like the works of the Marquis de Sade, have an audience. Even literary purists who would place Gor novels into the nearest garbage receptacle will admit the movies weren't Gorean Fantasy. They may herald this as a good thing, but that's only because John Norman's books have such a polarizing effect; for some.</p><p>But so what if the novels aren't well known or well liked? They have spawned a sub-genre all their own. This strange, and often controversial, sub-genre of fantasy exists in a black hole nexus of moral ambiguity. Given the nature of the novels, a faithful adaptation, even sans the Tarns, would likely of had limited appeal. Studios are concerned solely with making money, which too often means pandering to "mainstream" audiences, which begs the question: Why buy the movie rights to such a controversial novel series in the first place? But, having purchased the rights, why then proceed to murder the author's vision and film a counterfeit version of Gor?</p><p>Now there's a loaded question. After all there really is nothing new under the sun. Every writer borrows ideas and, like a kitchen alchemist, mixes them together in what they hope will be a winning formulae. Should filmmakers really be held up to a higher standard than the writers themselves?</p><p>Yes. Because the filmmaker is not creating they are interpreting, or rather breathing life into the text; or such is the task they should be doing. Alas filmmakers have become like the authors of distant antiquity who borrowed the names of famous biblical or mythological figures to lend authenticity to their own writings. Filmmakers have taken to borrowing the name and title of an established author to pass off their own work, which in any other industry would be considered criminal fraudulence. Sadly filmmakers get away with this time and time again. They've produced counterfeit Bible stories, forgeries of historical events, and, Hollywood's most recent favorite, the remake dubbed a "re-envisioning", which are almost always bogus and patently fraudulent fabrications totally unrelated to the source material. Sometimes they work yet, too often, they do not.</p><p><center><img height="224" alt="Ingres - Grand Odalisque" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2481/3694196993_d35664dee1_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>But would the Gor movies really have been any better if the books had been adapted more faithfully? Perhaps. Then again the filmmakers were obviously clueless. As I mentioned in part one of this article I've never read the novels, yet I recognize them for what they are: an derivative blending of Edgar Rice Burroughs style of heroic fantasy laced with undertones of Arabian Fantasy. The scenes of slave girls so many find offensive are no different than the romanticized <a href="http://www.orientalist-art.org.uk/odalisque.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">odalisque</u></span></a> of Orientalist painters.</p><p><center><img height="531" alt="Moor Bath" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2455/3695009034_c5e9034119_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Indeed there exists an entire sub-genre of erotica, which does not have the same stigma attached to it as Gorean Fantasy, that's very similar to it in many ways. It's full of slave girls, masters, and <a href="http://www.harem.org.uk/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">harems</u></span></a>. And it has gotten better treatment in it's movie adaptations, why? Is it because Gor was published as genre fantasy rather than literature?</p><p><center><img height="271" alt="Harem Interior, Bath" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3551/3694195049_780f4fb608_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>This is the crux of the question about movie adaptations of genre fiction be they pulp planet stories, Harlequin romances, comic book fantasy, hard science fiction, horror, or crime dramas; be they set on distant alien worlds with strange sounding names like Barsoom, Arrakis, Gor, Pern, Amtor, or Middle-Earth. If filmmakers are not going to respect the author's written word and faithfully represent the source material what's the point? Liberties may be taken with narrative accounts of certain figures such as Genghis Khan, Caligula, Nero, or Cleopatra, as indeed the bulk of literary works about such personages is built upon speculation. Yet, even here, there are certain known and established facts about these historical figures that must be abided by.</p><p>Novels, unlike distant historical events, are not open to speculation. The authors words are plainly recorded in black and white. Alas filmmakers continue to despoil literary works without repercussion. The Gor movies were low budget productions that wandered far from the source material, thus alienating the fan base. Nor did they provide much for mainstream audiences or genre fans to like. Their plots were a threadbare fabric of generic clichés woven around shallow and transparent characters. Had the eponymous Tarns not been written out and replaced with horses, had there been some attempt to include science fiction elements, had. . If only. . But there wasn't. The Gor movies will never be more than campy, cheesy, unintentionally funny nonsense; and remembered for being as far removed from their source material as an atheist is from an Orthodox patriarch. Perhaps they could have been more, alas we'll never know.</p><p># End of Line</p><p></p><br /><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-31651276708160096442009-07-03T01:43:00.002-04:002009-07-03T02:22:54.394-04:00Gor, Lost in Adaptation or merely Lost?<p>This article is an extension of last week's series, <a href="http://cosmic-cinema.blogspot.com/2009/06/reflections-on-barsoom-part-1.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Reflections on Barsoom</u></span></a>, wherein it was noted numerous attempts to bring Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom novel series to the big screen have failed. Also outlined were certain concerns about the current Disney/Pixar movie project. If recent news articles are accurate the project has moved out of development limbo and is being rushed into production. That's almost never a good sign for a movie, especially one being adapted from a novel.</p><p>Fans of novels that get translated into big screen movies are all too often disappointed by how Hollywood treats their favorite stories. The most notorious example being David Lynch's <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087182/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Dune</u></span></a>. Yet despite Dune's perceived flaws it was far superior to the odd Sci-Fi channel spawned mini series. Alas it too often takes a poorly executed remake for audiences to appreciate these earlier adaptations. Conan the Barbarian was sniped at by fans of Howard's stories yet, compared to the Conan television series, the Conan movies were faithful adaptations. Which brings us back to the subject of our article.</p><p>Odds are you've probably never read the Gor novels though you may have heard about them. Having just read reviews for the movies it may come as a surprise to learn the novels have been described as everything from Barsoom with bondage to Taliban erotica. In this article we shall continue to examine the treatment of novel-to-movie adaptations by examining Barsoom's cousin fantasy world. .</p><p><center><img height="330" alt="Book 1" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2597/3676125564_7c134066bc_o.jpg" width="203" /></center><p></p><p>Gor, aka Counter-Earth, is the fantasy world of author <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Norman"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">John Norman</u></span></a> as first introduced in the novel "Tarnsman of Gor" (1966). An series of some 20+ odd novels followed. .</p><p><center><img height="300" alt="Book 19" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2566/3676119442_87a4481845_o.jpg" width="188" /></center><p></p><p>The Gor novels are often described as indulgent misogynistic 'adult' fantasy patterned loosely after Edgar Rice Burroughs <i>John Carter of Mars</i> series. It is a world in which politically incorrect warriors ride around on gigantic birds; the eponymous <i>Tarns</i> of the first novel; while slave girls gyrate provocatively for their (male master's) pleasure. Dancing girls have been a staple of historical epics since the days of <a href="http://www.cecilbdemille.com/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Cecil B. Demille</u></span></a>. .</p><p><center><img height="313" alt="Cleopatra (1934)" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3617/3676123772_18b00e4ed1_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Even when production budgets were sparse, such as in the old Italian sword-and-sandal epics, there were dancing girls. .</p><p><center><img height="214" alt="Hercules (1958)" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2609/3675315481_b7f501f0f6_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>However what made the Gor novels notorious were the themes espoused by the author, namely that it is woman's natural state to be subservient to men in all things. This led to the novels being criticized as gutter treatments of heroic fantasy using clichéd science fiction tropes as a crutch to prop up mediocre pseudo sword-and-sorcery. But are such criticisms valid? Here's a typical novel quote from a typical Gor fan site:<br /></p><dir><dir><p>The dancing of the female before the male, that she be found pleasing and he be pleased, is one of the most profound lessons in all of human biology. Others are when she kneels before him, when she kisses his feet, when she performs obeisance, when she knows herself subject, truly, to his whip.</p><p><b><span style="font-size:100%;">- Dancer of Gor, pg 193</b></span><br /></p></dir></dir><p>But it's not merely the "philosophy" or politically incorrect views expressed by the author that has gotten this series into so much trouble. The terse writing style is off-putting:</p><dir><dir><p>He was a Gorean master. I was at his mercy. I wondered if I could have felt so much his, so completely surrendered, if he had not possessed this complete power over my life and body. I belonged to him. But I did not want him to whip me, or put me in the slave box. I wanted only, desperately, to please him. And I knew I must, for I was his slave.</p><span style="font-size:100%;"><p><b>-Captive of Gor, pg 343</b></span><br /></p></dir></dir><p>Such is the tone of the Gor novels and the nature of the fantasy world. Yet, inexplicably, two movies were produced during the 1980s. It is these curious movies we shall return our attention to next.</p><p><center><img height="342" alt="Books 1 + 2" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2439/3676121732_cdb850f332_o.jpg" width="410" /></center><p></p><p>In the meantime the curious can use any search engine to discover myriad articles ranging from harsh criticisms like <a href="http://bellatrys.livejournal.com/330344.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Planet of the Complete Bloody Psychopaths</u></span></a> to the slightly less harsh <a href="http://looking2dastars.livejournal.com/37737.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Some thoughts on the Gorean Scandal</u></span></a>, apologist tracts <a href="http://www.soulshaven.f2s.com/gen_defenseofgor.php3"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">In Defense Of Gor</u></span></a>, fan favorite <a href="http://goreen.over-blog.com/article-30712131.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Slave Quotes</u></span></a>, and sites dedicated to living the idealized 'Gorean lifestyle'. The latter often include illustrated articles showcasing "positions" for slave girls. The Kama Sutra these are not yet the illustrations are often just as gratuitous. Warning many are NSFW!</p><p># To be concluded in part 2</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-17645084462239274562009-07-01T09:00:00.002-04:002009-07-01T09:16:14.516-04:00Outlaw of Gor<p><b>Year:</b> 1989</p><p><b>Director:</b> John 'Bud' Cardos</p><p><b>Cast:</b> Urbano Barberini, Rebecca Ferratti, Jack Palance, et al.</p><p><b>Format Viewed:</b> VHS</p><p><b>Run Time:</b> 90 minutes</p><p><b>Recommended:</b> Yes, but only if you haven't read the novels and are a fan of campy B-movies.</p><p><b>MPAA Rating:</b> PG-13 (For fantasy violence and gratuitous hats.)</p><dir><dir><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;"><p align="justify">Gorean Fantasy: Despite assumptions based on the name this form of fantasy has very little- in fact it has next to nothing at all- to do with blood and gore. Rather this fantasy genre is about self-indulgent male oriented slave girl fantasy.</span><span style="font-family:Arial;"></p></dir></dir></span><p><b>Premise:</b> Tarl Cabot, like John Carter- the character Cabot is all too obviously based upon- is transported to a distant world where he has many fantastical adventures.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Tarl Cabot & Nimrod" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2557/3673409206_03742b7f04_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>The Movie:</b> As the movie begins sad sack Tarl Cabot is drowning his sorrows in a bar with an nimrod friend when his ring starts to glow. Before you can say Holy Batsh*t a flashback of scenes from the first movie plays. As Mr. Morose was not having much fun getting drunk Cabot decides it's time for he and his chum to depart. After hopping into his car and experiencing some cheesy fake lightning effects Cabot and nimrod sidekick wake up in a desert; again with no car in evidence. Cabot is way too excited about waking up in a desert. Conversely his friend whines on and on for what seems like twenty minutes then, for no apparent logical reason, a group of desert nomads- wielding obviously store bought bows no less- appear over a dune and attack! Of course Cabot's nimrod sidekick is totally useless. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Useless idiot!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3544/3673411724_d16c2b8419_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>After this ludicrous staged "fight"- in which a day actor can actually be seen dropping his bow from horseback as he starts to fall before Cabot lays a single hand on him- the pair of bumbling buffoons manage to get away and find a city. Actually it's supposed to be some sort of merchant tent-city but the illusion of the would be heroes walking in off the desert is ruined as a farming kibbutz (complete with freshly plowed furrows) can actually be seen in the top of one frame. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Tent City" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3653/3673414270_8d4ff094fc_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Someone asks them who they are, Cabot gives his name, which leads to a bunch of people yelling "Cabot!" as if they're Lou Costello. (If by some miracle you got that reference that's a example of how dated the gags in this movie are.) Outlaw of Gor tries so hard to be humorous there are times it'll leave you thinking someone had to be two sheets away from brain dead drunk when they filmed this. That any could have actually thought this nonsense was funny is proof drugs impair judgment.</p><p>By the way at this point we're actually only 11 minutes into the movie, though it feels more like 111 minutes, and there is only more excruciating lameness ahead. But if you can withstand the juvenile dialogue Outlaw of Gor does have dancing girls. Watching their swanlike display of rhythmic dancing and bold strutting will leave you wondering why these movies have been neglected by the DVD market. Sure the story is about as contrived as a loincloth clad barbarian swinging a bastard sword at a necromancer in a tropical jungle but the dancers are a feast for the eyes and worth the price of admission.</p><p><center><img height="308" alt="Dancing Girls!" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2558/3672610641_6e61680f55_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Otherwise Outlaw's laughs derive from the vagaries of low budget filmmaking, such as incongruous costuming and dialogue so bad that, despite giving their best over the top performances, the actors look painfully embarrassed. In short this is a gem of low budget pseudo sword-and-sorcery schlock that makes the Deathstalker movies look like meaningful social commentary scripted by Aristophanes.</p><p><center><img height="154" alt="Bargain basement sorcery." src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2601/3672606619_5daf88c213_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p></p><p><b>Analysis:</b> What does a PG-13 rated Gor sequel get you? An shockingly milksop movie that's so absurd it's unintentionally funny. Yet, sadly, is no closer to being proper Gorean Fantasy than Fantasia. Though it does have a slave market. .</p><p><center><img height="154" alt="Slave Girls!" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2580/3673420768_312746be2e_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Lots of funny hats and shiny bikini tops. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Smile if you're a happy slave girl!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3409/3673417436_6112f7f53e_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>And ridiculous dialogue. .</p><dir><dir><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Tarl Cabot: Those Priest-Kings are very dangerous. They have . . unknown powers.</span></p></dir></dir><span style="font-family:Arial;"><p></span><span ><b>Verdict:</b> See review of </span><a href="http://cosmic-cinema.blogspot.com/2009/06/gor_29.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span >GOR</span></u></span></a><span >.<br /></span><br /></p><p><b>Availability:</b> Sadly Outlaw of Gor is only available on <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/630130456X?ie=UTF8&tag=cosmcine-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=630130456X">VHS</a><img style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; MARGIN: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none" height="1" alt="" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=cosmcine-20&l=as2&o=1&a=630130456X" width="1" border="0" /> </p><p>#End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-56644292116852983982009-06-29T10:40:00.000-04:002009-06-29T10:41:19.832-04:00GOR<p><span style="font-family:Arial;"><b>Year:</b> 1988</span><br /><br /></p><p><b>Director:</b> Fritz Kiersch</p><p><b>Cast:</b> Oliver Reed, Jack Palance, Urbano Barberini, Rebecca Ferratti, et al.</p><p><b>Format Viewed:</b> VHS</p><p><b>Run Time:</b> 95 minutes</p><p><b>Recommended:</b> Yes, but only if you haven't read the novels and are a fan of campy B-movies.</p><p><b>MPAA Rating:</b> PG (For fantasy violence and graphic depictions of crazy hats.)</p><dir><dir><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;font-size:100%;"><p align="justify">Gorean Fantasy: Despite assumptions based on the name this form of fantasy has very little- in fact it has next to nothing at all- to do with blood and gore. Rather this fantasy genre is about self-indulgent male oriented slave girl fantasy.</span><span style="font-family:Arial;"></p></dir></dir></span><p><center><img height="159" alt="Life on Gor." src="http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/7498/gor06.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>Premise:</b> Tarl Cabot, like John Carter- the character Cabot is all too obviously based upon- is transported to a distant world where he has many fantastical adventures.</p><p><b>The Movie:</b> Professor Tarl Cabot is giving a lecture about a magic ring and the legend associated with it. In fact he drones on and on about this ring and what it's supposed magical powers are. Cut to the professor in his car. As he's driving away a storm kicks up, the professor loses control, and the next thing you know it's WHAM!</p><p><center><img height="319" alt="Tarl Cabot" src="http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/968/gor01j.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>The professor wakes up on what appears to be coarse gravel. As the professor gets up and looks around it's sudden shocked realization time. For as far as the eye can see all there is to see is desert. Did he die and go to hell? Is this a concussion induced hallucination? Where the heck is his car?</p><p>Before we can fully question what's going on Tarl wanders upon a village, or maybe it's a town, we see it from a distance so it's hard to tell. Again, before the audience can fully question what's going on, we see said town is under attack! Fires are set, men are killed, women run frantically to and fro, and amidst the chaos a single female warrior stands valiantly before a crimson colored stone battling all who dare approach her.</p><p><center><img height="320" alt="Talena, Warrior Princess" src="http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/6277/gor02.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>It's obvious that this female warrior is important because we keep seeing her between cut scenes. Alas not even her best Red Sonja impression can help her now. There's just too many enemy warriors. Ultimately they overwhelm her and the other defenders, and this is only the beginning of the movie!</p><p><center><img height="158" alt="Slave Market" src="http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/7545/gor05.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Alas Gor doesn't keep this action packed pace throughout. It has it's moments, a Sapphic tavern brawl here, a bevy of scantily clad dancing girls there, a glimpse of a slave auction, alas the dull plodding drone of the cliché riddled plot gives us a movie that is easy on the eyes but hard on the ears. Nor do the problems end there. Here's a sample of dialogue:</p><dir><dir><p>Tarl Cabot: Hey, what is this place?</p><p>Talena: It's a tavern.</p></dir></dir><p>In case you're wondering if the character is really THAT stupid: Yes, yes he is.</p><p><center><img height="319" alt="The Tavern" src="http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/5918/gor04.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>That's Tarl in the "tavern" and the entire time he wears one expression on his face: befuddled buffoon. Granted part of that may be due to the cheapness of the sets and ridiculous scenario and costumes but. .</p><p><b>Assessment:</b> Gor is supposed to be an adaptation of the semi-popular and controversial novel, Tarnsman of Gor, by John Norman; the nom deplume of one John Lange Jr. If you've ever heard anything about the Gor novels this movie will probably baffle you. If you haven't ever heard of the novels not to worry, this movie has not relation to them beyond the use of a few character names and the use of the title. While technically science fantasy; being about a college professor that gets "magically" whisked away to an distant alternate world; Gor plays more like a sword and sorcery feature complete with swords, sandals, and low budget sorcery. Yet, for an 80s era sword-and-sorcery, movie Gor is very tame. Almost disappointingly so.</p><p><center><img height="319" alt="The Villain" src="http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/251/gor03.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>Verdict:</b> For an adaptation of a sword-and-sorcery novel Gor does not have much of the magical in it. The movie lacks even the rudimentary sense of enchantment found in Conan the Barbarian or the truly fantastical found in Hercules in the Haunted World. The special effects are sporadic and less impressive than those found in similar movies like Steel Dawn or The Adventures of Hajji Baba thus rendering Gor barely half as good as either of those movies. Yet it spawned a sequel: OUTLAW OF GOR.</p><p>Sadly GOR is only available on: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/630116380X?ie=UTF8&tag=cosmcine-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=630116380X">VHS</a><img style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; MARGIN: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none" height="1" alt="" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=cosmcine-20&l=as2&o=1&a=630116380X" width="1" border="0" /></p><p>#End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-87232507508843234032009-06-26T01:38:00.005-04:002009-06-26T13:27:21.990-04:00Reflections on Barsoom, Part 3<p><center><img height="400" alt="Book 2" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_A1bcphfW2ww/Sj8Wepnek6I/AAAAAAAAAPs/VtDha-d7F1o/s400/covers5.jpg" width="240" /></center><p></p><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><p>3. The Naked Truth of Mars</span></p><p>If the past is prologue Disney, currently helming the John Carter of Mars project, is not likely to rush to take up the baton of aboriginal rights. This studio ran like a scared cat to the editing room to alter a brief segment from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasia_(film)"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Fantasia</u></span></a> that featured cartoon <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dnS0bgaf-o"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Centaurettes</u></span></a>. The fact faux nudity and/or characterizations of fantasy creatures in a cartoon bothered anyone would be funny, if it weren't so ridiculous. But, to be fair, that anyone felt a cartoon required editing for content is a sign of shifting attitudes. What once didn't raise an eyebrow several decades ago becomes scandalous, or politically incorrect, today and so too might attitudes that obtain today seem archaic or puritanical decades from now.</p><p>How non-Aboriginal cultures treat depictions of aboriginal cultures often reveal far more about the non-Aboriginal culture than the true state of the aborigines themselves. One need look no further than documentaries aired on channels like PBS, Discovery, History, The Learning Channel, et al to see how such programs come saddled with warnings about "indigenous nudity" and, more often than not, blurring and digital fogging. Yet the MPAA rubberstamps movies depicting amoral violence in which it's okay (by their standards) to display eviscerated human bodies and internal organs yet, unbelievably, insanely, a woman's bared breast or buttocks must be blotted out as verboten to see. What this says about our culture, and it's self-anointed blowhard watchdogs, is too disturbing to contemplate here.</p><p>Nudity, in and of itself, is neither salacious nor provocative. Nor is it pornographic or erotic. It merely is. One does not become any less human, or worthy of dignity, because one has disrobed or lacks apparel. If this were the case no one would ever take off their clothes to bathe. We are born naked, not wearing burkas. Strip us of our trappings of culture and civilization and we become little more than naked apes, do we not?</p><p><center><img height="304" alt="Naked Ape" src="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_A1bcphfW2ww/Sj8We2Jq5AI/AAAAAAAAAP0/IDCNGKzWyA0/nakedape.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Such reflections are at the core of the Barsoom novel series. For while nude John Carter is never truly naked, for he retains his wit. Edgar Rice Burroughs novels remind us it is intellect, not clothing, or trappings of civilization, that separate mankind from primates. Yet another reason for the lack of clothing on Barsoom, besides lack of resources for extensive textile manufacture, may be environmental. Extremes of heat and humidity may make it impractical for a primitive culture- or a culture with limited agricultural resources teetering on the brink of collapse, as is the case on Barsoom- to have more than rudimentary and crude textiles. Yet this does not preclude the use of skins or furs. Such certainly seems to be the case on Barsoom, or so we can extrapolate based on the following passage from <i>Warlord of Mars</i>:</p><dir><dir><span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:85%;"><p>The moment we entered the city Talu threw off his outer garments of fur, as did we, and I saw that his apparel differed but little from that of the red races of Barsoom. Except for his leathern harness, covered thick with jewels and metal, he was naked, nor could one have comfortably worn apparel in that warm and humid atmosphere.</span></p></dir></dir><p>Remember the examples of Frazetta's artwork? They're relatively timid and decorous in comparison to the reality of Barsoom as writ. And this is what Disney is planning to adapt into a movie? It doesn't make sense. Already the speculation is circulating with articles like <a href="http://hollywoodcrush.mtv.com/2009/06/15/john-carter-of-mars-will-it-dethrone-twilight-as-the-best-romance-flick/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">`John Carter of Mars': Will It Dethrone `Twilight' As The Best Romance Flick?</u></span></a> Viz:</p><dir><dir><p>"While “Twilight” fends off “True Blood” for supremacy over the vampire romance market, the Stephenie Meyer-penned series might have an unlikely lovelorn competitor to contend with — the newly announced “John Carter of Mars” starring Taylor Kitsch could well be Hollywood’s next romantic hit."</p></dir></dir><p>As are concerns such as: <a href="http://blogs.amctv.com/scifi-scanner/2008/03/jcblbmarjpg.php"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Disney to Fast Track <i>John Carter of Mars</i> Film</u></span></a>:</p><dir><dir><p>John Carter is about as Disneyfiable as Tarzan is: In other words, not very. Worse, John Carter was a filthy Confederate reb. That's part and parcel of the character, and while Carter never really shows any racist tendencies in the novel (he does, after all, get along exceedingly well with both the green and red men of Mars), it's an integral part of his character, part of what makes him unique. Disney would whitewash that. And it's hard to believe Pixar would do justice to the visceral bloodshed, violence and carnage of Burroughs' classic martian pulp novels.</p></dir></dir><p>The worry is Disney will treat this like the typical Hollywood "property" and hire a hack to make-up their own story, slap the Barsoom name on it, and thus exploit Edgar Rice Burroughs novels to make a quick buck. The marketing possibilities if Disney turns this into a costume epic ala <em>Pirates of the Caribbean</em>, as the director already has indicated is the plan, are extensive. The money Disney could potentially rake in on product tie-ins with clothing lines, T-shirts targeted at 'tweens, fast food chains, action figures and their accessories, Halloween costumes, and plush toys shamelessly targeted at children will likely be phenomenal.</p><p>Alas, with the director announcing, before shooting so much as a single frame of film, this will be rated PG-13, and a PG-13 'tween flick at that, John Carter of Mars isn't likely to qualify as a faithful representation of Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom. It may be a pallid <a href="http://www.comics.org/series.lasso?SeriesID=1648"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Goldkey</u></span></a> version but not likely the Barsoom of A Princess of Mars. This may have critics crying foul and asking if Disney hasn't purchased their MPAA rating and that's why the project, which has languished in limbo for decades, is suddenly getting "fast tracked". There's lots of money at stake, yet so too is the literary vision of Edgar Rice Burroughs.</p><p><center><img height="426" alt="comic" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3547/3647669412_6576828faf_o.jpg" width="300" /></center><p></p><p>If Disney follows the usual pattern licensed products will be pushed into retail stores all across the country as part of the marketing blitz leading up to the release of the feature film. If we're lucky this may include <a href="http://www.comicon.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=540120#Post540120">new deluxe editions</a> of the novels. And, this being Disney, there may even be a John Carter of Mars ride at Disneyland. That could be fun. But Barsoom isn't a carnival funhouse, it's not a joyride, nor should it be portrayed as such.</p><p>Studios buy the rights to something and (too often) just ignore the source material and make up an entirely different story, slap on the title of the "property" and wait for the suckers to buy tickets. It's repulsive. But it's business as usual in Hollywood. Yet, if you were to pull this kind of shell game in the food industry by advertising, say, salmon on your menu but serving catfish instead you'd be put out of business and probably fined, if not thrown into jail. Is it that Hollywood doesn't care? They say they respect authors' and their work, yet the movies they produce say otherwise. It's mind-boggling.</p><p>So what if Disney isn't likely to have the moral courage to present a candid and true representation of the aboriginals of Barsoom. They're a corporation, not cultural anthropologists. Should we hate them for wanting to make money? It's not like Disney is in the business of shaking kids down for their lunch money. At least there is going to be some version of Barsoom on the big screen, that's a good thing, right?</p><p><center><img height="325" alt="Book 2" src="http://lh3.ggpht.com/_A1bcphfW2ww/Sj8WelgFjoI/AAAAAAAAAPw/4dnOrMlqGmw/covers6.jpg" width="409" /></center><p></p><p>For those interested in the real Barsoom the full text of the novel "A Princess of Mars" can be downloaded from these sites: <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/62"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Project Gutenberg</u></span></a>, <a href="http://www.booksshouldbefree.com/book.jsp?id=374"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Books Should be Free</u></span></a>, and can be read online here: <a href="http://www.hoboes.com/FireBlade/Texts/Princess/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">http://www.hoboes.com/FireBlade/Texts/Princess/</u></span></a>. Those looking for more information on Barsoom or the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs should visit the following sites: <a href="http://www.barsoom.com/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Barsoom</u></span></a>, <a href="http://www.barsoomia.org/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Barsoomia</u></span></a>, <a href="http://www.erbzine.com/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Official Edgar Rice Burroughs Tribute and Weekly Webzine Site</u></span></a>, or <a href="http://www.rehupa.com/">The Robert E. Howard United Press Association</a>. There's also some old concept art for <a href="http://www.design-concepts.co.uk/Mars/johncarterplaces.htm">Set Sketches for John Carter of Mars</a> (1970's version), <a href="http://philsaunders.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-john-carter.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">More John Carter</u></span></a>, <a href="http://philsaunders.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-jcom.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">More JCOM</u></span></a>, here's a page of <a href="http://www.angelfire.com/trek/jcb/erbz937.html">Rare Unreleased John Carter of Mars Illustrations</a> and, of course, there's always the artwork of <a href="http://imaginistix.blogspot.com/2009/01/john-carter-of-mars-painting.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Julie Bell and Boris Vellejo</u></span></a>:</p><p><center><img height="294" alt="Barsoom" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_A1bcphfW2ww/Sj8We1qtc1I/AAAAAAAAAP4/c6k_1bop40A/barsoom.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p># End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-55823117691722642692009-06-24T01:51:00.006-04:002009-06-24T13:11:08.854-04:00Reflections on Barsoom, Part 2<p><center><img height="458" alt="Book 4" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2178/3646878143_ecabca4758_o.jpg" width="280" /></center><p></p><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:130%;"><p>2. The Artistic Vision of Mars</span></p><p>Art reflects not only the mores and attitudes of the culture in which it is produced but reflects the sensibilities of the times in which it was created. While most readers familiar with the Barsoom novels may envision Edgar Rice Burroughs' hero, John Carter, and his adventures on Mars as portrayed in the artwork of Frank Frazetta:</p><p><center><img height="530" alt="Classic Frazetta." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3394/3647650242_3ae7acb50a_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>That work represents but one artistic vision of Barsoom. Yet a quick Google for "Princess of Mars" turns up an ad containing this iconic model kit representation of Dejah Thoris:</p><p><center><img height="433" alt="Iconic princess." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3268/3647646292_5f4cf53dff_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Look for fan art online and this is an example of what you'll find:</p><p><center><img height="467" alt="Inspired fan art." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3644/3647653670_d4023649a8_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Obviously that's inspired by master illustrator Frank Frazetta's work. Thus this artistic vision of Barsoom has obtained as the popular one. Granted times, and cultural mores, change. A Princess of Mars was first published circa 1912 as a multi-part serial in All-Story magazine. And it was portrayed quite differently way back when:</p><p><center><img height="413" alt="Book 1" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2435/3647670308_013fc9cb58_o.jpg" width="310" /></center><p></p><p>Yet it is Frazetta's work which is remembered for it more faithfully captures Barsoom as written in the novels. Yet even Frazetta's art was somewhat inhibited. For comparison here's an example of fan art for the character Dejah Thoris:</p><p><center><img height="313" alt="Dejah Thoris" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3383/3646851947_cb8445ccd8_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Actually, as you may have noticed, this particular character is far more prominent in the artwork than is the titular hero. Dejah Thoris has become an iconic figure, so no pressure on the director or actors, yet if fans don't get something like. .</p><p><center><img height="480" alt="Dejah in action." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3369/3647658686_b29ecb23ae_o.jpg" width="320" /></center><p></p><p>Or perhaps. .</p><p><center><img height="535" alt="Dejah sketch." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3580/3646857239_18324570f0_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Or maybe even something like. .</p><p><center><img height="447" alt="comic" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2481/3646869885_5d312d7399_o.jpg" width="290" /></center><p></p><p>The 'fan boys' will probably really get nasty, though not without just cause. Disney is synonymous will family friendly entertainment. That begs the question: What are they doing buying the rights to a pulp adventure series in which the characters seem to be either naked or half naked most of the time? Viz.</p><dir><dir><span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:85%;"><p>I looked first at my lifeless clay there upon the floor of the cave and then down at myself in utter bewilderment; for there I lay clothed, and yet here I stood but <u>naked</u> as at the minute of my birth.</p><u><p>Naked</u> and unarmed as I was, I had no desire to face the unseen thing which menaced me.</p><p>With the exception of their ornaments all were <u>naked</u>.</p><p>She was as destitute of clothes as the green Martians who accompanied her; indeed, save for her highly wrought ornaments she was entirely <u>naked</u>, nor could any apparel have enhanced the beauty of her perfect and symmetrical figure.</span></p></dir></dir><p>There are two ways to interpret this. The characters are either totally nude or they aren't. Naked can imply defenseless, unprotected, exposed, or without covering (as of hair or fur). The word's meaning depends on context. In the above the context is clear, it's used in reference to a character without apparel or clothing. Yet, as typical of many primitive cultures with limited textile resources, they are not entirely lacking ornamental adornments; thus in the context of their culture they are neither naked nor nude. It is only through the prism of our own culture that they appear so.</p><p>So why did the author portray the aboriginal inhabitants of Mars this way at all? Surely he must have been aware of this fact?</p><p>Indeed he was!</p><p>The characters are 'nude' in the novels not for salacious effect but because nudity was, once upon a time, viewed as being metaphoric for a return to an Eden-like state of primal grace. Yet the author also knew that their was a fine line between the "noble naked savage" and the merely "naked savage" and thus it is left to the reader to make their own mind up about the nature of the natives of Mars. Alas, in our contemporary society of the relative present, expressions of sexuality have fallen victim to politically correct fascism. In the lemming rush to judgment nudity has become viewed by purveyors of dogmatic Political Correctness as salacious and impure. This poses a dilemma since the main alien antagonists, a race of being called Tharks, and indeed most of the inhabitants of Barsoom, don't really wear clothes. Then again neither does every culture on our own planet. Witness the following images of <a href="http://www.amazonz.info/xingu/index.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Xingu</u></span></a> <a href="http://www.amazonz.info/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">natives</u></span></a> of the Amazon river basin in Brazil:</p><p><center><img height="296" alt="natives" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3308/3646859971_6ed465f6d0_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Despite elements of modern influence in their dress their traditional ceremonial garb remains rather minimal, aside from body paint/tatoo art and beads. .</p><p><center><img height="271" alt="natives" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3362/3646862411_549a88ec3b_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>But are they nude or merely naked? Perhaps they are neither. There has always existed a double standard where depictions of aboriginal cultures in their so-called "native state" exist. Edgar Rice Burroughs pulled no punches with his writing about the aborigines of Barsoom, which is perhaps why his novels are so well received. They possess a reality as gritty and candid as any National Geographic article about native cultures. Alas few Hollywood studious have the moral, or intestinal, fortitude to stand up and treat aboriginals and their culture, even fictionalized representations, with the respect they deserve.</p><p>But what does this mean for the John Carter of Mars movie adaptation?</p><p><center><img height="229" alt="Dejah Thoris" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3601/3647671034_50485b5123_o.jpg" width="250" /></center><p></p><p># to be concluded in Part 3</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-15523046757173310392009-06-22T01:22:00.007-04:002009-06-22T16:18:42.814-04:00Reflections on Barsoom, Part 1<p>"This piece is something of a follow-up to last weeks <a href="http://cosmic-cinema.blogspot.com/2009/06/john-carter-of-mars-is-go.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">John Carter of Mars is GO!</u></span></a> examining certain concerns about the announced movie adaptation. It really began as a reply to a comment and just sort of ballooned into an full on article. While a bit long and dry in places I hope it isn't a entirely dull read. - KP<br /></p><p><center><img height="456" alt="Book 11" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3138/3646880135_dfbe3acf6c_o.jpg" width="280" /></center><p></p><p align="left"><br /><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:130%;">1. The Harsh Reality of Mars</span></p><p>If memory serves there's been talk of adapting Edgar Rice Burroughs' <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barsoom"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Barsoom</u></span></a> novels for the big screen for quite some time, the first almost-was production being an animated feature circa the 1930s then the almost-was Ray Harryhausen version discussed circa the 1980s. Paramount also had the rights circa 2000, but nothing much came of their attempt either. There may have been other aborted projects but these seem to be the best known almost-got-made attempts. So what's the hold up? What's the difficulty?</p><p>Perhaps the biggest obstacle are the novels themselves. These are old school pulp science fiction written not just in a time before political correctness but in a era when ideas about utopianism, naturism, socialism, eugenics (betterment of the species through selective breeding and/or genetic enhancement), and progressivism were being explored. Too, herein are aliens that are truly alien- not merely humans dressed up in bad costumes with prosthetic foreheads- and unabashed sexism. Or rather what the post-PC world would view as sexism. The hero, John Carter, is the epitome of what contemporary post-modern feminists would derogatorily refer to as an testosterone fueled chauvinistic male.</p><p>Why are these problems? Aside from the potentially awkward "politically incorrect" aspects there has been a shift in our social mores and attitudes. John Carter comes from an era when men were expected to be men, meaning self-reliant individuals who think for themselves and bow to no one. That's quite a departure from the prevailing mentality in our contemporary genuflecting victim culture. Too, the Tharks pose unique challenges all their own as they look like this:</p><p><center><img height="251" alt="Thark" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2424/3647680376_a14bcfe5b0_o.jpg" width="200" /></center><p></p><p>Easy to do in animation or a CGI environment but difficult to do in a live-action movie. And that's just one of many strange looking creatures inhabiting Barsoom. Which explains why Pixar is involved. </p><p>Burroughs' Martians also seem to be an idealized eugenic society presaging the current trends in "green" eco-progressivism demanding the exertion of control over not merely the environment, per se, but how humanity lives (and dies) within it. Witness the following passage from <i>A Princess of Mars</i>:</p><dir><dir><span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:85%;"><p>I do not mean that the adult Martians are unnecessarily or intentionally cruel to the young, but theirs is a hard and pitiless struggle for existence upon a dying planet, the natural resources of which have dwindled to a point where the support of each additional life means an added tax upon the community into which it is thrown.</p><p>By careful selection they rear only the hardiest specimens of each species, and with almost supernatural foresight they regulate the birth rate to merely offset the loss by death.</p><p>Each adult Martian female brings forth about thirteen eggs each year, and those which meet the size, weight, and specific gravity tests are hidden in the recesses of some subterranean vault where the temperature is too low for incubation. Every year these eggs are carefully examined by a council of twenty chieftains, and all but about one hundred of the most perfect are destroyed out of each yearly supply. At the end of five years about five hundred almost perfect eggs have been chosen from the thousands brought forth. These are then placed in the almost air-tight incubators to be hatched by the sun's rays after a period of another five years. The hatching which we had witnessed today was a fairly representative event of its kind, all but about one per cent of the eggs hatching in two days. If the remaining eggs ever hatched we knew nothing of the fate of the little Martians. They were not wanted, as their offspring might inherit and transmit the tendency to prolonged incubation, and thus upset the system which has maintained for ages and which permits the adult Martians to figure the proper time for return to the incubators, almost to an hour.</p><p>The incubators are built in remote fastnesses, where there is little or no likelihood of their being discovered by other tribes. The result of such a catastrophe would mean no children in the community for another five years. I was later to witness the results of the discovery of an alien incubator.</span></p></dir></dir><p>While the term eugenics has become disused or carefully tiptoed around this is only because when taken to it's extreme it can become a dogmatic doctrine of racial purity. Such a doctrine was espoused by Nazi eugenicists, but then any science taken to extremes can become sinister. It is important to remember that Mr. Burroughs was not alone in writing about such thematic issues in his novels and that they were written long before the Nazi's came to power in Germany. Nor does the fact John Carter was a officer of the Confederacy bear any greater implications beyond the facts as laid out in the opening chapter of <i>A Princess of Mars</i>; namely that our would be hero finds himself destitute and adrift:</p><dir><dir><span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:85%;"><p>At the close of the Civil War I found myself possessed of several hundred thousand dollars (Confederate) and a captain's commission in the cavalry arm of an army which no longer existed; the servant of a state which had vanished with the hopes of the South. Masterless, penniless, and with my only means of livelihood, fighting, gone, I determined to work my way to the southwest and attempt to retrieve my fallen fortunes in a search for gold.</span></p></dir></dir><p>John Carter, formerly Captain of the Army of Virginia, was thus a man who found himself handed the shit end of fortune's stick yet managed to turn it around to his advantage. These facts form the thread from which the world of Barsoom was woven. Pull one out, white wash the facts, or substitute other threads and it is no longer Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom.</p><p><center><img height="313" alt="Book 1" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3297/3647679748_76a8fcbc95_o.jpg" width="403" /></center><p></p><p>The current Barsoom project, tentatively titled <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0401729/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">John Carter of Mars</u></span></a>, was first announced sometime circa 2006 or 2007, after Disney acquired the rights from Paramount, and, needless to say, this has had numerous actors and directors attached to it over the years. But, if the news from last week is any indication, it seems Disney/Pixar has finally decided to green light the project. More than that it appears this is planned to be a trilogy. But will it be Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom that makes it to the big screen?</p><p><center><img height="321" alt="Book 4" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2449/3646872601_7d9445fa75_o.jpg" width="406" /></center><p></p><p>One can only hope this adaptation wont be turned into some ludicrous, nonsensical, piece of garbage aimed at ADD riddled 'tweens and thus avoid the fate that befell the Land of the Lost movie. Alas this is Disney and Hollywood, where the odds that any adaptation will be faithful to the source material are slim to none. That may be a cynical view but then Hollywood is a cynical town. Then again considering this is also a Pixar movie that means there should be some potentially awesome CGI, I say potentially because Pixar does animated movies well but it remains to be seen how well they will be able to integrate their work into a live-action feature. Hopefully they'll do the VFX very well.</p><p>Despite this silver lining the fact remains it's a Disney production. One can't help but despair that what will be produced is a dumbed down, white washed, politically correct version of Barsoom. How much of the Barsoom found in Mr. Burroughs' novels will actually make it onto the screen? Sadly given the current trend to pander to the 'tween demographic with tweaked-out adventures one can only hope the worst that will be done is John Carter of Mars will be turned into a action adventure comedy with a romance subplot.</p><p><center><img height="229" alt="Dejah Thoris" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3601/3647671034_50485b5123_o.jpg" width="250" /></center><p></p><p># to be continued in Part 2</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-80019284719165014922009-06-18T02:23:00.000-04:002009-06-18T02:23:01.033-04:00The Thing Below<p><b>Year:</b> 2004</p><p><b>Director:</b> Jim Wynorski</p><p><b>Cast:</b> Billy Warlock, Kurt Max Runte, Catherine Lough Haggquist, Peter Graham-Gaudreau, Warren Christie, Kiara Hunter, David Richmond-Peck, Colin Lawrence, Jim Thorburn, Craig Brunanski, Julie Hill, &tc.</p><p><b>Format Viewed:</b> Satellite Broadcast</p><p><b>AKA:</b> Sea Ghost/ Ghost Rig 2</p><p><b>MPAA Rating:</b> R</p><p><b>Score Card:</b></p><p><center></center><br /><center><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/miseenscenecrypt/Home/rating-system"><img height="331" alt="Click for Score Card info." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3617/3637942150_8303c2bc48_o.jpg" width="262" /></a></center><p></p><p><b>Premise:</b> An pathetically cheap looking CGI tentacle creature-alien-monster-mutant something gets loose in a oil rig/secret military lab/ship board corporate research facility someplace and kills a bunch of people then other people get sent in to deal with-find-recover something and the mutant-alien-crazed monster whatever starts killing/stalking/eating/mating with their corpses/G-d knows what.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="CGI!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3356/3637124757_2674c6d859_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>The Reality:</b> THE THING BELOW plays like an awful, ineffective, plodding, illogical, and utterly pointless knock-off/remake of DEEP EVIL.</p><p><b>The Story:</b> Until recently I thought the worst movies ever produced were made by the Polonia Brothers, but those are relatively competent no-budget productions in comparison to this phoned in ineptitude. As the movie starts and the titles roll we are treated to library stock footage of naval vessels. This is used to establish an ethereal military relationship before the credits cut to a storm tossed ship wherein a gaggle of idiots decide...</p><center><img height="307" alt="Psst. Radiation hazard!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3342/3637930218_82cf33d1d3_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><br /><p>At the height of a hurricane-like storm no less, to move an super-ultra-amazingly dangerous container. .</p><br /><br /><p><center><img height="307" alt="Notice anything strange?" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3359/3637118517_bfe50b78d6_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>A container holding the super-ultra-amazingly dangerous what-the-hell-ever. As if that wasn't retarded enough they even DROP said container (after a character comments on how bad it would be if they dropped it). .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Monster in a Canister!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3611/3637121323_ab609dedfa_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>And then proceed to stand around like stoned monkeys staring on in dim-witted confusion. (Actually stoned monkeys would have enough sense to fling their own poop at the critter.) Even The Asylum would be ashamed to release a movie this ill conceived. THE THING BELOW isn't just a fillip on the ear of reason it's an visual frontal lobotomy. From here on it only gets worse. The first 40 minutes are a listless vacuum of purpose. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Looking for the director." src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2423/3637938768_c9fe1a5386_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>It's very obvious the cast was in this strictly for the money/screen credit/ craft services table/because someone had nude pictures of them. Speaking of nudity the filmmakers obviously realized what utter worthless shite they were working with and decided to try to distract the audience with a strip tease (about 38 minutes too late). .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Hot!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3544/3637122517_41b4591cc1_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>Assessment:</b> Words fail. Seriously this movie is the bastard child of inbred morons from the planet Ludicrous. The premise is clichéd, the plot ill defined, and the movie itself a complete and total bore. Which is astounding considering how much inane exposition the characters bring the movie to a screeching halt to recite. Bad enough THING BELOW contains a slurry of regurgitated stock footage, most of which can be seen in such prime z-grade action flicks as AGENT RED, CURSE OF THE KOMODO, and, believe it or not, DEEP EVIL. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Deja Vu!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3405/3637130385_83aec89be4_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>Verdict:</b> This is essentially the cinematic version of a mad lib with the director filling in gaps between recycled footage. According to IMDB it took three writers to come up with this plebian silliness, at least one of which also worked on DEEP EVIL. Three writers and it's still inept garbage! If bad movies were a medieval village THE THING BELOW would be a murdered leper buried in it's dung heap. To say this "movie" appears to have been edited together from an motley assortment of library stock footage, scenes rescued/lifted from other DTV projects, and held together by the loose rubber band of a script written on rolling papers would be like calling a Category 5 hurricane <i>a little bit of bad weather</i>.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="A 3 hour tour..." src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2467/3637119671_08db87df34_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Caveat Emptor THE THING BELOW is available on: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0009PVZT6?ie=UTF8&tag=cosmcine-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0009PVZT6">DVD</a><img style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; MARGIN: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none" height="1" alt="" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=cosmcine-20&l=as2&o=1&a=B0009PVZT6" width="1" border="0" /></p><p># End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p></span>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-54200221498010631852009-06-17T11:06:00.004-04:002009-06-17T11:16:48.119-04:00John Carter of Mars is GO!<p>But will you want to watch it?</p><p>This news item has been percolating for some time. But as there have been announcements before that came to nothing I decided to take a wait-and-see approach. Seems, this time, the news may be more than mere pipedream rumor. Long story short the long awaited John Carter of Mars movie is finally a go. The bad news: It's going to be a Disney production. According to Screen Crave: "The director is leaning towards an older target audience, and expects the movie to be rated PG-13."</p><p>In other words it's going to be another dumbed down piece of 'tween targeted drivel. But then we already knew Hollywood was probably going to rape this "property", so don't expect a faithful adaptation; the novels are too politically incorrect for that. But maybe the director, Andrew Stanton (Wall-E, Nemo), is intelligent enough to realize such target audience pandering didn't work for Land of the Lost and come to his senses. Wouldn't you much rather hear a director talk about how faithful an adaptation he's going to make? The man's not even started shooting and he's already more worried about target demographics than shooting a faithful adaptation of the novels. Such is the way of Hollyweird; business first filmmaking last.</p><p>As for the cast so far it includes Taylor Kitsch (as John Carter), Lynn Collins (as Dejah Thoris) and, according to Screen Rant, Thomas Haden Church in an as yet to be identified role. The movie is slated to begin production either sometime in 2010 or this November, depending on which article you want to believe.</p><p>For more info see the articles at <a href="http://screenrant.com/thomas-haden-church-joins-john-carter-mars-rob-13316/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Screen Rant</u></span></a>, <a href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i45a4bf33efc1791759741019c8d1d2d7"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Hollywood Reporter</u></span></a>, <a href="http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2009/06/12/john-carter-of-mars-is-finally-set-to-lens-this-november-in-utah/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">MTV Movies Blog</u></span></a>, <a href="http://video.reeltalktv.com/player/?id=1125245&dst=rssreeltalktv"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Reel Talk</u></span></a>, <a href="http://screencrave.com/2009-01-13/wall-e-director-adapts-john-carter-of-mars/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Screen Crave</u></span></a>, <a href="http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=6790649"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">KSL</u></span></a>, and <a href="http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/04/14/michael-chabon-writing-john-carter-of-mars/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Slash Films</u></span></a>.</p><p># End of Line</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-18449954107649588602009-06-16T10:51:00.002-04:002009-06-16T10:58:25.339-04:00Gemma Arterton "Clash of the Titans" update<p>Seems there's some minor buzz about pictures from the set of Clash of the Titans being posted to actress Gemma Arterton's website. Not much of real substance in the online articles so I'll just briefly recap what's known so far. The current U.S. release date for Clash of the Titans is listed as March 26, 2010. It's a remake/re-envisioning of the 1981 movie. Louis Leterrier (The Incredible Hulk, Transporter 2) is the working director. Cast includes Sam Worthington as Persues, Liam Neeson as Zeus, Ralph Fiennes as Hades, and a whole lot of other people you've probably never heard of filling in various other roles. And what's Gemma Arterton's role?</p><p>This from actress Gemma Arterton's <a href="http://www.gemma-arterton.net/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">official website</u></span></a>: "I'm playing a demi-goddess named Io. It's going to be a huge ensemble piece with loads of characters. The original was one of my favourites when I was a kid. The script is quite different from the previous film, though." (Read full comments <a href="http://www.gemma-arterton.net/projects/film/2010_titans.php"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">here</u></span></a>.)</p><p>Some pics of the actress as Io from her site:</p><p><center><img height="266" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_A1bcphfW2ww/SjeryYAfT6I/AAAAAAAAAPM/gGHL5o5u3e4/normal_001.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><br /><p><center><img height="400" src="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_A1bcphfW2ww/SjeryXsF85I/AAAAAAAAAPQ/jhc598d1cVs/normal_020.jpg" width="383" /></center><p></p><p>There's also scans of a UK Empire magazine article about the movie to be found in the site's Clash of the Titans <a href="http://www.gemma-arterton.net/media/index.php?cat=45"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">galleries</u></span></a>. If you're looking for some real information about the movie I'd recommend the article <a href="http://screenrant.com/sam-worthington-talks-clash-of-the-titans-avatar-kofi-12615/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Sam Worthington Talks Clash of the Titans, Avatar</u></span></a> posted at Screen Rant in which the actor is quoted as saying: "We’ve done two weeks…We took on the Medusa. We’ve took on the witches. Next week we’ve got to take on the Scorpius and then we go and f*cking kill the Kraken." Classy. There's also a interesting article up at ScreenCrave, <a href="http://screencrave.com/2009-04-01/two-join-clash-of-the-titans-remake/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Two Join Clash of the Titans Remake</u></span></a>, that's a bit dated but has some interesting snippets of character information.</p><p># End of Line</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-55562495511095583052009-06-14T19:30:00.000-04:002009-06-14T19:30:00.203-04:00Star Runners<p><center><img height="307" alt="Familiar font." src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2433/3624949677_920cb40cc4_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>Year:</b> 2009</p><p><b>Director:</b> Mat King</p><p><b>Cast:</b> Connor Trinneer, James Kyson Lee, Toni Trucks, Aja Evans, &tc.</p><p><b>Format Viewed:</b> Satellite Broadcast</p><p><b>Rating:</b> TV-14 (LSV)</p><p><b>Premise:</b> In a far distant future two "Runners", being cargo haulers who operate within the "gray area" of legality, are cajoled by officials of the U.P. (United Planets) into picking up a "crate" which turns out to contain something far more unusual, and sought after, than even these veteran smugglers expected.</p><p><b>The Reality:</b> A quaint space opera throwback whose first few minutes has the feel of an episode of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0303461/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">FIREFLY</u></span></a> or <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0250750/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">STARHUNTER</u></span></a> but quickly evolves into a laid back action-adventure hybrid of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0134847/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">PITCH BLACK</u></span></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120201/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">STARSHIP TROOPERS</u></span></a>.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Battling the bugs." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3311/3624952611_08d9459c84_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>The Movie:</b> This was the Sci-Fi Channel "original" movie for Saturday June 14, 2009 and stars Connor Trinneer, who played Trip in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0244365/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">ENTERPRISE</u></span></a>; and James Kyson Lee, Ando from <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0813715/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">HEROES</u></span></a>.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Wandering dark corridors." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3314/3625760930_70a7cf9b1d_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>The plot of STAR RUNNERS is reminiscent of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379786/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">SERENITY</u></span></a> sans the "Reavers" but retaining an shadowy corporate-government-military organization worried about maintaining the lid on one of it's secret cover-ups. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Aliens?" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2449/3625772240_7548c6c24f_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Alas the background universe is not as well developed here as in either FIREFLY or STARHUNTER. There's mention of an "underground" though who or what they're fighting against isn't entirely clear. One assumes the 'verse STAR RUNNERS inhabits is supposed to be similar to that of FIREFLY and STARHUNTER but that's pure conjecture. There's mention of a "U.P." but it's never explained who or what this organization is, though at one point there is mention of a "United Planets" so one assumes they're the equivalent to the Alliance or Federation from Star Trek. There's also a mysterious female, Asta, found in a cryogenic shipping container- just like River from FIREFLY- around whom the story more or less revolves.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Asta." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3406/3625766056_5ed8e57870_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Nor do the similarities end there. Seems River, I mean Asta, is being hunted by shadowy corporate-military goons that want to keep her from spilling the beans about what happened on Miranda, er, Alpha Centari 3 or some such. However Asta was not victim of sinister medical experiments, rather she's more of a evolutionary mutation, a super human with preternatural ability ala Leeloo from <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119116/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">FIFTH ELEMENT</u></span></a>, so I guess that means she has the Divinity Cluster gene? (If you got that reference give yourself a Dr. Pepper!)</p><p>And that's just explaining the set-up for the characters! Long story short the Runners are forced to transship their "item" via civilian starliner. Said craft is attacked, the pilots knocked-out, our erstwhile Han Solo anti-heroes forced to take the helm and hyper jump into uncharted space where the vessel crashes on a planet. Here the plot becomes something of a crazed amalgam of PITCH BLACK and STARSHIP TROOPERS.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Asta looking bored." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3316/3625775788_d9076e5fb4_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>Assessment:</b> This is a Sci-Fi Channel original movie. Why it was labeled TV-14 LSV is beyond me as it seemed tame. The dialogue is suggestive of a good movie and nothing more, the only real violence was against CGI creatures that were about as realistic as the CGI critters in a FPS shooter from a decade ago, and there was no overt sexuality. That said I've been ignoring Sci-Fi original movies for a while. So I was rather surprised to see SERENITY listed on my menu as playing on Sci-Fi followed by a Sci-Fi original movie called STAR RUNNERS. It sounded like a space opera adventure. I was hooked!</p><p>There is a reason the Sci-Fi channel had SERENITY playing before this movie. And that reason, I feel, is because this has the feel of a fan boy's homage to that movie and the series it was based on. Alas the CGI is typical of a Sci-Fi Channel production. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Get the windex it's a screen smudge!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3636/3624945171_97585737dd_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Which is to say it's fairly bad. You can take a screen cap of a creature in a scene from any Ray Harryhausen movie and it will look like something. The above is just an amorphous smudge. But which is more embarrassing the above or the below. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Battlestar Garbagescow?" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3407/3624946651_3a16331f80_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>How's that for a CGI knock-off of the Battlestar Galactica! It actually looks a lot better when viewed during playback. Don't worry. The movie didn't end with everyone getting killed off. Believe it or not the movie leaves itself open to a sequel, or potential series, though it's doubtful anything will come of it. Shame as Connor Trinneer does very well in the role of congenial yet no-nonsense space smuggler.</p><p><b>Verdict:</b> There's two ways to look at this movie, kindly and with a hypercritical eye. The kind reviewer will note how this appears to be a homage to a number of series and movies and, while a bit slow at times, seems to be a movie made by those with a sincere love for the genre. The hyper-critical reviewer will note how the opening titles use the Battlestar Galactica font and use this as a launching point to rail against the director, producers, CGI/VFX. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Blurry UFO." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3652/3625768956_7e1155da38_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>And blame the post production team for lack of originality while lambasting the Sci-Fi channel for airing such clichéd yada-yada-yada. True, the plot may not have been any more imaginative than titling a movie <a href="http://cosmic-cinema.blogspot.com/2008/11/battle-planet.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">BATTLE PLANET</u></span></a> and while the dialogue was a bit lame in places there was also good dialogue and dialogue delivered lamely. However this is not a terrible movie. Yes, some things could have been handled better, like Asta's reveal, but a good critic will realize why it was done the way it was. To do it any other way would have people griping about the movie copying FIREFLY.</p><p>However the pacing could have been better but the movie didn't have me rolling my eyes and wanting to channel surf to see what else was on until about the one and a half hour mark when the "shaky cam" effect started to become annoying and the CGI started to get overused. STAR RUNNERS could have been an unused script for STARHUNTER or FIREFLY turned into a feature length film but it feels more like this was a fan boys love letter to the space opera genre. Otherwise, aside from the annoying vagueness of the back story, this is okay viewing for a evening in which you have nothing better to do. Those who aren't fans of sci-fi and space opera with a low tolerance for campy borderline lame drama should probably avoid this one.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="L8r!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3411/3624956377_905f9b89ff_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p># End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-38152716546490750372009-06-12T16:46:00.001-04:002009-06-12T16:48:15.749-04:00New Director tapped for Conan feature film!<p>According to reports online <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118004850.html?categoryid=13&cs=1"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">here</u></span></a>, <a href="http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/06/12/friday-the-13th-director-marcus-nispel-tagged-for-conan/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">here</u></span></a>, and <a href="http://www.wired.com/underwire/2009/06/horror-maestro-marcus-nispel-nabs-conan-the-barbarian-film/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">here</u></span></a> Director Marcus Nispel, in what Variety calls a move "ending a nine-year development ordeal to reinvent the Robert E. Howard-created barbarian," will now helm the Conan the Barbarian (or whatever they plan to call it) movie project for Nu Image/Millennium/Lionsgate.</p><p>Who is Marcus Nispel?</p><p>Wired dot com calls him an "master of gory reboots". Reboots? Ah, yes, he's the one responsible for the remakes of <i>Friday the 13th</i> and <i>The Texas Chainsaw Massacre</i>. Haven't seen either movie. Heard one sucked harder than the black hole at galactic center while the other was dull, dreary, and totally unnecessary. Forget which was which. Of course you have to take such comments with a grain of salt these days as remakes almost never compare well to the original movies, even when they're fairly decent flicks in their own right.</p><p>Variety reports the remake is set to start filming sometime later this year in Bulgaria and South Africa "with a script by Thomas Dean Donnelly and Joshua Oppenheimer, whose credits include 'Sahara' and 'Cowboys and Aliens'." Cowboys and Aliens? Never heard of it. And what sort of a vision of Conan can we expect this director to bring?</p><p>Again, per Variety, "Nispel said he will blend his childhood imaginings of the character with the influence of the famous Conan illustrations by Frank Frazetta, and the influence of such viscerally violent period films as Mel Gibson's 'Apocalypto'."</p><p>Say what? Apocalypto? That plodding, asinine, dull, intense, blood spattered, nudity filled, crazed smack upside the head of a neo-historical epic? This is what the director is citing as an influence? Well, as far as directors go, Mel Gibson is not that bad I suppose. At least Nispel isn't enamored of the works of Uwe Boll. And, like the guy at the <a href="http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/06/12/friday-the-13th-director-marcus-nispel-tagged-for-conan/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">MTV blog</u></span></a> commented. .</p><p>"Say what you will about Mel Gibson and his headline-worthy antics, but “Apocalypto” really could be a perfect model for “Conan.” Bizarre make-up effects, brutal warfare and exotic locales? Sounds like the ideal road map for an epic “Conan” movie to us."</p><p>Could be good. Could be bad. Just so long as it finally gets made!</p><p>For more on this developing story I direct you to the fine articles at <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2009/06/12/marcus-nispel-directing-conan-the-barbarian/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Cinematical</u></span></a>, <a href="http://chud.com/articles/articles/19822/1/MARCUS-NISPEL-THE-BARBARIAN/Page1.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Chud</u></span></a>, <a href="http://geeksofdoom.com/2009/06/12/marcus-nispel-to-replace-brett-ratner-as-director-of-conan/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Geeks of Doom</u></span></a>, and of course <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118004850.html?categoryid=13&cs=1"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Variety</u></span></a>.</p><p># End of Line</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-82217859912536795342009-06-11T12:28:00.007-04:002009-06-11T12:58:42.020-04:00LAND OF THE LOST: A CONTINUATION<p>The more comments I read online about Will Ferrel's LAND OF THE LOST movie the more I wonder what is really behind Hollywood's continuing master plan of buying established "properties" and turning them into dumbed-down formulaic drivel. Do they honestly believe the average Joe and Jane Doe are morons? Or is there perhaps something far more sinister going on here?</p><p>Put your tinfoil hats on boys and girls because a rant be a-coming! Got those tinfoil hats on? Excellent! As I was saying. .</p><p>It seems that with every remake and/or "re-envisioning" I read about the quality and content of the movies gets progressively worse. I use the word "progressive" advisedly as someone commented that this movie was <em>progressive</em>. Really? Now I'm no expert on politics (discussions of "the left" and "the right" and their purported differences and agendas confound me) but there was a progressive movement that took root around the early part of the 20<sup>th</sup> century that; not unlike the National Socialist party (<i>Nationalsozialismus</i>) which came to power in Germany circa the late 1920s; had a master plan to foment economic, political, social, and moral change. In short this is social engineering. To grossly oversimplify the goal of a social engineer is to manipulate the masses to affect societal and/or geo-political change. How does one begin? Simple, by chipping away at the foundation of the established order.</p><p>Over time these cracks will weaken the foundation and the social engineer, who is following a master plan for slowly and deliberately changing the established order, will insert slivers into those cracks to widen them. This is plainly what's been going, not just here in the United States, but on a global scale for the past few decades. And, based on the comments I've been reading, Will Ferrell's movie may be the latest sliver intentionally inserted into those cracks.</p><p>Most of the commentary I've read seems to be saying that Hollywood has taken what was a naïve Saturday morning kids series with cheezy and dated VFX and turned it into a repository for juvenile bathroom humor, sexual innuendo, and brazenly targeted (inapporpriately) a movie that's totally lacking moral substance at a impressionable youth audience. The original series wasn't exactly Aesop's fables but it did end on a moralistic note most of the time. Apparently the Hollywood re-envisioning takes a great big dinosaur piss on morality and laughs about it while doing so. I'd say it's a shameful disgrace but Hollywood has no sense of shame. But it is yet another lost opportunity to create something worthwhile.</p><p>Thus, since Hollywood seems to not want to put forth the effort to make entertaining movies as they are apparently caught up in the cogs of some social engineer's master plan for destroying the established order of our society I've taken it upon myself to present a germ of what might have been. .</p><p>(Psst. You can take those tinfoil hats off now.)</p><p align="center">* * *</p><p>Opening Scene: Xenoarchaeologist Stewart (male) & Cryptozoologist Temperence (female) visit the ranch of an elderly Marshall to interview him about an incident that happened in the Grand Canyon. They're interested in folklore about Egyptian tombs but discover something far more bizarre.</p><p>After much cajoling (and talking with Marshall's current wife) Marshall agrees to talk. .</p><p>Stewart: What do you remember?</p><p>Marshal: Not much. Will, Holly, and I were rafting. It was a beautiful day, Holly was using the new compassing I gave her. .</p><p>Temperence: Compass?</p><p>Marshall (laughing): Yes. I know it sounds silly, since we knew where we were, but it was a different time. I wanted Holly to know how to take care of herself and so I was teaching her all that I could, including how to use a compass.</p><p>Stewart: So there was nothing unusual then?</p><p>Marshall: I didn't say that.</p><p>Temperence and Stewart exchange glances.</p><p>Marshall: I remember Holly saying something about the compass not working right anymore then. . Then the entire canyon all around us began to shake. It was like being caught in the greatest earthquake ever known.</p><p>Temperence: Only there's no record of such a quake.</p><p>Marshall (face a mask of grief): Don't I know it. </p><p>Marshall's wife: That's enough. It's time for you two to. .</p><p>Marshall (holding up had): No, it's alright, I'll be alright. .</p><p>Stewart: Maybe we should come back some other. .</p><p>Marshall (face suddenly stern): I'm old. Not much time left, best I get this story out while I still can, while there's someone willing to listen. Look, I know there's not record of any quake, if you've done your research like you say you have you know I was found feverish and delirious several weeks and several hundred miles away from where our raftng journey began.</p><p>Fade to a montage scene recapping the series as a voice over begins leading into the familiar, yet different, LOTL theme song.</p><p align="center">* * *</p><p>What Hollywood, in it's heinous desire to urinate on all that was good in the original series, failed to realize is they had a great opportunity here to create a continuation <u>series</u> of movies. The principle actors are, I believe, all still alive. The perfect setup would have been to pick-up the story these many years later. Their is a lot of interest in U.F.O. related folklore and enigmas, like cryptozoology, so all you'd really need is to find a hook. From what I've read they sort of use this as a hook, but in a back-handed manner. But I digress. .</p><p>The best hook is in the series itself. The family was rafting in a canyon. What canyon? Well let's call it the grand canyon. Anyone that's read a book like FORBIDDEN ARCHAEOLOGY or a magazine like ANCIENT AMERICAN knows there's plenty of "mysteries" out there for a script writer to exploit. The first hit in Google for the search parameters; "grand canyon" AND Egypt; was this: <a href="http://www.crystalinks.com/gc_egyptconnection.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Grand Canyon - Egypt Connection</u></span></a>. Another hit was this article: <a href="http://www.rense.com/general6/egy.htm"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">Ancient Egyptian Treasures In The Grand Canyon?</u></span></a> And there's also this: <a href="http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/nov2/gcegypt.htm"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;">An Archeological Whodunnit! - Egyptian Artifacts in the Grand Canyon</u></span></a>.</p><p>Therefore our premise is a simple one: researchers researching the Grand Canyon mysteries go to meet with Marshall, as outlined above, and this sets them on a expedition whose journey leads them into the LAND OF THE LOST. Wherein they meet not a series of unfunny site gags but a perilous Lost World of strange fauna and unusual flora. A Lost World wherein we might encounter Will and/or Holly who perhaps rescue our would be xenon-archaeological explorers. Thus a grand adventure unfolds on screen drawing on themes from UFOlogy, myth, and folklore that's merely the first chapter of a new film franchise.</p><p>Alas this doesn't seem to be the route Hollywood chose. Based on the scathing critical reviews I've read (and the scenes they bombarded the public with on cable/TV as part of the ad campaign) they wanted fart jokes, sexual innuendo, gay site gags, and to depict the primitive Neanderthal-like Chaka as a pervert unable to control himself. Yeah, that's a nice one folks, they're basically saying primitives and primitive cultures are incapable of self-control. This is the same sort of crude "humor" the Nazi eugenicists used to vilify Jews. Is this really what Hollywood thinks is funny? Recycling the "humor" of racist hatred?</p><p>Yet, having not seen the movie, I have to step back, take a deep breath, and ask myself if it's really as bad as some have made the movie sound. I hope not. I really hope not. </p><p># End of Line</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-12262924248657381882009-06-10T01:40:00.002-04:002009-06-10T01:40:01.308-04:00Why no Carmilla movies from Hollywood?<p>Hollywood. Motion picture remake capital of the world. Yet, with an endless supply of movies and scripts to reuse, their choices of late have been questionable at best. The blogosphere has been abuzz with critics and reviewers castigating the most recent theatrical debacle, Will Farrell's ill received LAND OF THE LOST. Alas Hollywood is a leviathan. Like Godzilla it is fierce and unstoppable with goals mere humans fail to comprehend. Surely the executive who greenlit LAND OF THE LOST probably assumed it would be a cakewalk to take some 70s era Saturday morning TV show (whose movie rights they probably picked up for a song and a dance) and hire some hack script writer to "re-envision" it by updating it to modern times and adapting it for that all-important 'tween demographic! C'mon a PG-13 low brow comedy starring Will Ferrel, how could you lose, right?</p><p>I'm sure that executive probably wished he'd greenlit some Alf, Saved By the Bell, The Facts of Life, Eight is Enough, Happy Days, Benson, or F Troop: The Movie instead. But she (or he) didn't so I'm going to dust off an old post and share an grand idea with Hollywood that's got EASY MONEY written all over it.</p><p>Since vampire themed movies and series seem to be "in" right now how about revisiting a Hammer Studios classic: The Karnstein Trilogy. You know, that series of movies about Sheriden Le Fanu's Carmilla? It's a literary classic. EASY MONEY!</p><p>More precisely what we are going to produce is a new three movie arc similar to the one put out by Hammer Studios. Remember vampires are "in" they're "hip" and "cool" and both adults and 'tweens love 'em! Better yet you can have your cake and eat it too. Film all the nudity and gore you want, edit it for theatrical release in both PG-13 and R versions. Milk that audience. Or, heck, just release it to theaters PG-13 then release the UNCENSORED super duper DIRECTOR'S CUT to a special edition DVD. EASY MONEY!</p><p>Thus, for your consideration, I present my take on re-Inventing the Hammer Karnstein Trilogy. Are you listening Hollywood?</p><p><strong>First:</strong> Return to the source.</p><p><strong>Second:</strong> Nix the pseudo-Satanic Devil worshipping mumbo-jumbo and replace it with psuedo-Occult mumbo-jumbo suited to the time period.</p><p><strong>Third:</strong> Re-write the scripts as part of a larger interlinked story arc.</p><p><strong>Fourth:</strong> Alter the line-up so "Twins of Evil" becomes the lead-in "prequel" movie of the trilogy. This will require a bit of rewriting as it needs to set the stage for "Vampire Lovers" and should provide some background for Carmilla, thus making her entry in "Vampire Lovers" part of her flight from the Witch/Vampire Hunters of Twins of Evil leaving Lust to become more of a suspense thriller ghost story.</p><p><strong>Fifth:</strong> Any of the following actors who are still alive and willing to appear in a movie should be worked into these remakes via cameos, bit parts, &tc: Udo Kier, Dame Edna, Helen Mirren, Tom Baker, Paul Naschy, Sandahl Bergman, Max von Sydow, and any other genre regular I might have forgotten who'd be willing to appear.</p><p>That said you need name talent. But not just any name talent. We need someone in this that will pique an audiences curiosity, get them interested in the movie based just on the strenght of name recognition. That said here's one possible casting route. .</p><p><center><img height="740" alt="Easy Money!" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3355/3613053998_f20aaf133b_o.jpg" width="410" /></center><p></p><p>Of course it may be a bit tricky getting these gals to want to appear in such a movie franchise. You don't want to break the bank on actors salaries so, if they can't be convinced, you'll need a back-up plan. Which, EASY MONEY, should probably begin with a open casting call. Preferably looking for actual twins. You'll probably save money this way. I know, crazy idea, but it just might work!</p><p>Calm down. You can still hire models, if you must, but, EASY MONEY, you know how the game is played these days. Product placement is everything. Why not, say, get Hugh Hefner to PAY YOU to give his playmates a cameo. Talk about product placement! Wink, wink nudge, nudge.</p><p>All kidding aside, Hollywood, you really can do this thing. Yes you can. So let's get serious and begin with. .</p><b><span style="font-family:Tempus Sans ITC;color:#800000;"><p><span style="font-size:130%;">Twins of Evil</span></p><p></b></span>Bring this closer in line with the facts established in the written story (which will really be what <i>Vampire Lovers</i> is about) as much as possible for a prequel. I've got a solid cast outlined that's sure to be a box office hit, might need to alter the story a little, but don't lose any of the salaciousness. Here we are introduced to Carmilla and at least two attendants, as there was a woman in the coach and a coach driver who must escape with her. Thus this can serve as the reason for her flight in the second movie.</p><p>Here's a sample cast, just to give you a general idea of what could be. Not saying there aren't better choices out there but, at present, these actors would probably be fairly decent choices. Besides I know you're probably jonesin' for a name recognition fix.</p><p>Gustav Weil. . . .Sean Bean<br />Dietrich. . . .Ben Kingsley<br />Maria Gellhorn. . . .Mary-Kate Olsen<br />Frieda Gellhorn. . . . Ashley Olsen<br />Ingrid Hoffer. . . .Claudia Black<br />Countess Mircalla. . . .Milla Jovovich<br />Count Karnstein. . . .Gil Bellows</p><br /><b><span style="font-family:Tempus Sans ITC;color:#800000;"><p><span style="font-size:130%;">The Vampire Lovers</span></p><p></b></span>Definitely keep the innocent Sapphic subtext but tighten the story up a bit here or there. Mainly by showing how alone Laura is so that the audience sympathizes with and better understands why she so readily welcomes Mircalla. It's that innocent hunger for friendship resulting from isolation and loneliness, in addition to Laura's naïveté, which Mircalla preys upon. That was something the original movie glossed over. Also the movie needs an new ending suitable as a set up for the final movie in the trilogy arc. Not too many changes otherwise, aside from fresh costuming and sets, of course.</p><p>General von Spielsdorf. . . .Pete Postlethwaite<br />Baron Joachim von Hartog. . . .Steve Railsback<br />Laura. . . .Alyson Hannigan<br />Mircalla Karnstein. . . .Milla Jovovich<br />Emma Morton. . . .Kirsten Dunst<br />The Governess. . . .Jennifer Aniston<br /></p><b><span style="font-family:Tempus Sans ITC;color:#800000;"><p><span style="font-size:130%;">Lust for a Vampire</span></p><p></b></span>A few changes. As in the original a young woman attends a boarding school however she is not Carmilla raised from the dead by blood ritual. Rather she is merely a possible Karnstein descendant (Clarmila) who becomes possessed by the spirit of Carmilla. Similarly Giles, rather than being some satanic acolyte, now merely becomes an older man desperate to hold onto life who, through a series of events, learns of the true nature of the spirit possessing Clarmila and seeks to help the spirit take over her body en total so that he might become immortal. Too, more time should be spent developing the school setting, specifically the teachers, their classes, and student interactions. Thus this version is played more as a suspense thriller perhaps in the Suspira vein with lots of misdirection as to what's really going on. Viz. Clarmila may not be Carmilla but what if her classmates believe her to be her reincarnation at the beginning only to find out, after accepting she's not, that Carmilla's spirit is possessing her! And what of the mysterious Mircalla, the student no one seems to know?</p><p>Mircalla Karnstein. . . .Milla Jovovich<br />Clarmila. . . .Laura Prepon<br />Giles Barton. . . .David McCallum<br />Miss Simpson. . . .Helen Mirren (principal)<br />Janet Playfair. . . .Summer Glau (dance teacher)<br />Margaret Daunse. . . .Lake Bell (music teacher)</p><p>Not sure about the rest of the cast for this one. Obviously it would need a lot of "schoolgirls" and a few background characters. Did I mention the need to cast a LOT of NUBILE "schoolgirls"? C'mon all those 'tween gals? In a lesbian vampire movie? With the political climate the way it is this could be promoted as a gay anthem movie. Play your cards right and straight guys will flock to see this along with the entire gay and lesbian community. EASY MONEY!</p><p>Or you can grow a set and shoot political correctness in it's rabid head and just hire every Playboy and/or Penthouse playmate you can find and tell the MPAA to f--- off so they'll REFUSE the movie certification. I doubt 'tweens have changed all that much from my youth. Well, okay, they may be a bit more jaded about sexuality given what they have access to via the Internet but that's all the more reason NOT to pull the punches and make a dumbed down sanitized PG-13 piece of drivel. Besides nothing draws a crowd like people telling them they are NOT allowed to see something. Quote the MPAA's outrage in your ad copy. EASY MONEY!</p><p># End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan</p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-73924665026463494162009-06-09T05:28:00.002-04:002009-06-09T12:17:23.643-04:00Is Will Ferrell the cinematic Anti-Christ?<p><span style="font-family:arial;">Or is LAND OF THE LOST just a really, really, really bad movie? The </span><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/06/05/ST2009060500888.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span style="font-family:arial;">Washington Post</span></u></span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> seems to be leaning toward that opinion. Behold the first paragraph of their review of LAND OF THE LOST:</span></p><dir><dir><p><span style="font-size:100%;"><b>Soiler alert:</b> Toward the end of the comedy remake of Sid and Marty Krofft's '70s lunchbox leftover, "Land of the Lost," Will Ferrell is eaten by a <i>T. rex</i> and then excreted out the creature's back end. Fans know to interpret this as a personal artistic statement from the actor. It's a metaphor for most of his movies now, and what happens to audiences who go in hoping for another "Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy" and come out smelling of "Step Brothers" and "Semi-Pro."</span><br /></p></dir></dir><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Let me preface my remarks by saying, of all SNL alum, Mr. Ferrell is one of the more annoying character performers I've ever witnessed. Yet he does a very good George Bush impression. That said I neither like nor dislike the man, per se, so much as wish some of his unfunny characters would fade away. Alas he seems like a stain on a old carpet. No matter what you do you can't get rid of it.</span></p><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Here's another typical opening statement about LOTL from a review posted at </span><a href="http://www.freep.com/article/20090605/ENT01/906050317/Ferrell+and+friends+make+low-brow++silly+sport+of++Land+of+the+Lost+"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span style="font-family:arial;">Detroit Free Press</span></u></span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">:</span></p><dir><dir><span style="font-size:100%;"><p>Stupid on an epic scale or epic on a stupid one, "Land of the Lost" is as close as Will Ferrell comes these days to a kid-friendly movie.</span></p></dir></dir><p><span style="font-family:arial;">And an article at Newsweek (blog) asks the question: </span><a href="http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/popvox/archive/2009/06/05/is-land-of-the-lost-ferrell-s-worst-reviewed-movie-ever.aspx"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span style="font-family:arial;">Is "Land of the Lost" Ferrell's Worst-Reviewed Movie Ever?</span></u></span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> And contains the following intriguing comment:</span></p><dir><dir><span style="font-size:100%;"><p>The critics have been brutal -- anytime a movie is dismissed as "an ersatz pot of dinosaur piss," you might wanna consider other ways to drop $12.</span></p></dir></dir><p><span style="font-family:arial;">It gets better, or worse, depending on your point of view. Witness the following from the Huffington Post article </span><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marshall-fine/flee-from-iland-of-the-lo_b_210113.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span style="font-family:arial;">Flee from Land of the Lost</span></u></span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">:</span></p><dir><dir><span style="font-size:100%;"><p>See it and you lose your time, the money you spent on a ticket and, perhaps, the ability to walk upright without dragging your knuckles on the ground.</p><p>Abandon hope, all ye who enter.</p><p>With this film, Will Ferrell officially signals the end of his 15 minutes. Indeed, if it weren't for Matt Lauer, there'd be nary a laugh at all in this excruciatingly lazy and unnecessary film. I repeat: The biggest laughs belong to Matt Lauer.</span></p></dir></dir><p><span style="font-family:arial;">That's pretty harsh. Then again, much as I hate to admit this, I was excited about the movie right up until it was announced Mr. Ferrell would be the lead. I honestly don't dislike the man -witness the fact I never griped about him getting the part here- but his characters are absurd one-dimensional plays off a singular theme; namely the cliché of the "stupidly annoying moronic twit" with a inflated ego. You can only subject an audience to this sort of low-brow character so much before they get tired of it and turn on you, which may be what's happening here. Witness the appearance of such articles as </span><a href="http://www.tcpalm.com/blogs/thewatercooler/2009/jun/08/will_ferrell/"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span style="font-family:arial;">The end of the Will Ferrell years?</span></u></span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> which is a response to the article </span><a href="http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/06/is-america-over-will-ferrell.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span style="font-family:arial;">Is America over Will Ferrell?</span></u></span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> and you get the general idea. As one of the article writer's put it:</span></p><dir><dir><span style="font-size:100%;"><p>Frankly, I can only handle him [Will Ferrell] in small doses. He seems like a likeable enough guy, and as much as I want to enjoy him in roles, I rarely — if ever — have liked him in leading roles. To be completely fair, though, I haven't really been moved to see many of his leading role films. I tried to sit through 'Anchorman', but aside from the back alley 'anchorman fights', couldn't do it.</span></p></dir></dir><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Amen! Seriously you know it's bad when a remake that is a total departure from the source material generates headlines that aren't griping about the change in story line or characters but complaints about the lead actor and all his works. That's not fame it's infamy. And it's a shame to see because I used to watch LAND OF THE LOST as a kid. The fact LOTL is already being written off by some as just another lame piece of crap in the filmography of an overindulged comedian-turned-actor (witness the headline </span><a href="http://www.philly.com/inquirer/weekend/20090605_Call_Ferrell_s_latest__Wasteland_of_the_Lost_.html"><u><span style="color:#0000ff;"><span style="font-family:arial;">Call Ferrell's latest 'Wasteland of the Lost'</span></u></span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">) rather than being judged on it's own merits, or lack thereof, is sad.</span></p><p><span style="font-family:arial;">So, no, Will Ferrell isn't the cinematic Anti-Christ. He just seems that way to some when taken in large doses. I think there's a lesson to be learned in all this. Too bad Hollywood isn't listening.</span></p><p><span style="font-family:arial;"># End of Line</span></p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-90015141030138915922009-06-08T04:54:00.002-04:002009-06-08T10:20:49.475-04:00Deep Evil<p><b>Year:</b> 2004</p><p><b>Director:</b> Pat Williams</p><p><b>Cast:</b> Lorenzo Lamas, Adam Harrington, Ona Grauer, Lindsay Maxwell, Leah Cairns, Heather Feeney, Rachel Grodnik, Rachel Hayward, Michael P. Northey, Will Sanderson, Ron Selmour, Jim Thorburn, &tc.</p><p><b>Format Viewed:</b> Satellite Broadcast</p><p><b>MPAA Rating:</b> R</p><p><b>Score Card:</b></p><p><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/miseenscenecrypt/Home/rating-system"><center><img height="331" alt="Click for Score Card info." src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2434/3605026123_0016e9a132_o.jpg" width="262" /></a></center><p></p><p><b>Premise:</b> An pathetically cheap looking swamp creature-alien-monster-mutant something gets loose in top secret bio-research lab/secret underground military base/corporate research facility someplace in remote Alaska and kills a bunch of people then other people (read: the clichéd "crack military team") get sent in to deal with-find-recover something but not before the mutant-alien-crazed monster whatever starts killing-stalking-eating-mating with their corpses and G-d knows what else.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Swamp Thing?" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3644/3605027819_8507caf2b0_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>The Reality:</b> DEEP EVIL is your typical low budget wannabe ALIEN schlock that's really more a knock-off of THE THING starring the cousin of THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON.</p><p><b>The Story:</b> Deus misereatur it's a clichéd alien-mutant-monster in a lab movie! For those who don't know the drill amoral yet stupid-evil scientists in an uber secret lab are working with exotic-alien-mutant DNA and accidentally on purpose create a monster-hybrid-alien creature that kills and/or infests the stupid-evil scientists with its parasitical offspring. At least I think that's what's going on. The movie is apparently supposed to be (or was so bad their was no other way to edit this smelly carp) a flashback within a flashback as a prisoner in a room is interrogated and tortured. Which is basically what it feels like to sit through this; torture.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Drowning in chocolate milk?" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2447/3605839112_c098e6b3b9_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p><b>Assessment: </b>If you can get past the fact it looks like all the director/casting person did was hire some random people off the street, throw hastily assembled military style costumes on them, put them into rooms after telling them to make believe they're soldiers-lovers-interrogators-whatever and started "Zen" filming. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Don't ask, don't tell." src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3626/3605829712_553907f962_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>If you can get past the fact these ludicrous character freeform sessions seem to go on for an eternity before the director remembered this was suppose to be a horror/monster movie. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Cookie?" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3385/3605822544_bd888d48ab_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>If you can put your brain into neutral and not ask probing questions about what the heck is going on. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="Does my hand smell funny?" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2431/3605825086_f29bd73252_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>If, and I stress the word <u>if</u>, you can do any of that then you may be able to enjoy DEEP RISING. Otherwise you might as well just get someone to hit you in the genitals with a hammer, because that's what sitting through this movie will feel like to you. For the rest of us bad movie aficionados DEEP RISING has it's moments. .</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="WTF?" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2478/3605009509_548fe23b04_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Sadly they're too few and too short to make this movie recommendable to any but the most hardcore of bad movie gluttons. And yet. .<b></p><p>Verdict: </b>This movie is bad but not terrible and while its impoverished plot brings nothing new or interesting to a tired premise in need of retirement I'd rate DEEP EVIL as predictable yet not entirely boring; just unbelievably lame. Alas, if you are in the military, know someone in the military, have a family member in the military, or have ever watched a serious documentary about the military you may wish to stay away from this movie. Herein are egregiously error filled depictions of military personal that may induce migraines. OTOH nitpickers could make a fun game of pointing out the inaccuracies/mistakes/ridiculous nonsense in this movie.</p><p><center><img height="307" alt="CGI Spiders!?" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3608/3605014591_e19866fda8_o.jpg" width="400" /></center><p></p><p>Caveat Emptor DEEP RISING is available on: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0007LBLX2?ie=UTF8&tag=cosmcine-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0007LBLX2">DVD</a><img style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; MARGIN: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none" height="1" alt="" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=cosmcine-20&l=as2&o=1&a=B0007LBLX2" width="1" border="0" /></p><p># End of Line</p><p>Copyright © C. Demetrius Morgan<br /></p>Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-857484979801670287.post-29805057050911342009-06-03T20:13:00.004-04:002009-06-03T20:22:38.057-04:00Mise-en-scene Crypt now has a blogger presence!For those who don't know Mise-en-scene Crypt was my original cinema themed blog. It covered a wider range of movie genres that Cosmic Cinema, mostly b-movies and exploitation, alas it was hosted on Yahoo 360. An abandoned platform. Long story short I've set up several back-ups yet have not been satisfied with how any of them handle. So, today, having finally backed up my Yahoo 360 blog to Yahoo's new "universal profile" and being totally disgusted with the result I've made the move to blogger.<br /><br />It's a simple URL: <a href="http://cryptspace.blogspot.com/">http://cryptspace.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br />It took Yahoo 2+ years to get around to providing a means to download a back-up of the blog, the less said about that mess the better, but I've managed to get the first Mise-en-scene Crypt post, slightly modified, up and posted.<br /><br />Look for more posts soon.Kester Pelagiushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10386136979757090292noreply@blogger.com0