Realms of Fantasy and Science Fiction

Mythic structure in American God

2005-12-16T20:41:00.000+08:00

Until Mr. Wednesday's appearing on the plane, there is the Ordinary World for Shadow, a new
world again but he must face his wife's death and the her affair with his friend. The ally for Shadow is, of course, Wednesday, the other so called "old" gods like the Midnight Sisters,
Mr. Nancy, or Czernobog, and his dead wife. But Wednesday is also the mentor for Shadow, because he inspires his divine ability to create some phenomena, say, the snow. As to the mentor, the dreams of Shadow can be said to a mentor too, because they also indicate his identity as a divine.

The Call to Adventure is definitely Wednesday's offering job for Shadow. The First Shreshold
would be after the first meeting of Wednesday with other old gods. At first I think the Approach
to Inmost Cave would be to enter the imminent storm in the novel. But finally it's not so. I'd
like to say in this novel that's an Approach to Inmost "fact" instead when Shadow founds that
everything is fabricated by "Mr. World" and Wednesday himself.

The Supreme Ordeal is when Shadow is hung on the tree, the period when he cannot exist by
a human form. But I think the most interesting point for us to discuss the mythic structure in
this novel would be "who's the enemy anyway?" For most part of the novel it seems to be the
"new" gods, but near the end of the novel we found Mr. Wednesday is the archcriminal. However, he help inspire Shadow find his divine identity. So who is the true essential "enemy"?
The Elixir for Shadow is apparently the new ability and a whole new life promised by his new
identity.

Mythic structure in Reign of Fire and Beowulf

2005-12-16T20:28:00.000+08:00

Unlike Beowulf, in which there is an apparent space travelling (Inspired by the challenge, Beowulf goes to Denmark), in the movie Reign of Fire, the protagonist Quinn goes through a long period of time, from the death of his parents in his childhood to his leading the people to ward off the dragons. The comparison of Ordinary World would be a little controversial here, for we know of course the Ordinary World for Beowulf is his own country Geat, but the Ordinary World in the movie would be Quinn's childhood before his parents die, or before the first time the dragon attacks their fort. However, I'd say the Ordinary World for Quinn is the childhood before his parents die because as his parents die, he crosses the First Shreshold and knows that human beings walk into the history to compete with the dragons for life.

The ally for Beowulf is the Dane, and for Quinn is Van Zen and his crew. However, Van Zen and the crew are also the mentor for Quinn because they inspire him not to defend passively at the fort, instead he should cooperate with they to go to the male dragon's nest, which is the Inmost Cave to retrieve the land and history which human beings are the center beings again. In Beowulf, there isn't a mentor, and much in the poem is the stereotype of the mythic structure. Such as the orderly structure, and the characterization. The Supreme Ordeal in Beowulf is at the underwater lair where Grendel's mother inhabits (the Inmost Cave) and to kill her and bring the head of Grendel's corpse. In the movie, the Supreme Ordeal is apparently the time when Quinn and Van Zen face the male dragon.

The Elixir for Beowulf is the perpetual fame as the great hero to kill the dragons. On the other hand, for Quinn or, the human race in the movie, the Elixir is the save of their species, and the retrieval of their power over the land. The authority of writing history is once again back to the hand of human beings.

The last thing I want to add is that after comparing this two works, I found that there is a kind of apparent imperialism in Beowulf. Considering the motive of the Dane to kill Grendel, the first "Enemy" in the poem, I think it is no wonder that a neighbor will demonstrate to you when you are incredibly noisy during his sleep. The Danes kill the dragons for they cannot even bear the Other around them, and Grendel is killed because he demonstrates to his neighbor that they are too noisy (he does kill many of them, of course, because he IS a DRAGON! If it is the lions, bears or tigers instead of Grendel, the same result may occur too). However in the movie, the dragons appear to be much more agressive than Grendel and his mother to pillage human beings' land.

Mythic Structure in Neil Gaiman’s American Gods

2005-12-14T23:26:00.000+08:00

Around the 1990’s, screenwriters used mythic structure in their creations for films because of there was a revival of Joseph Campbell’s The Hero with a Thousand Faces Furthermore, Christopher Vogler’s book, The Writer’s Journey: Mythic Structure for Storytellers and Screenwriters makes this phenomenon more popular around the writers (for books or for films). From then on, the mythic structure is used widely and everybody keeps fascinated by it.

Neil Gaiman’s American Gods is a good example for showing the mythic structure because it basically follows the pattern from Campbell’s structure. When the story opens, we see the man, Shadow, is put in an ordinary prison and waits for his freedom while a storm is coming. Though the prison is not an ordinary world for most people, it still fits the usual atmosphere. Then he senses some bad things will happen along with the coming of the storm and someone tells him the news that his wife was killed in a car accident. Gaiman gradually builds up the unusual atmosphere in the ordinary world. After Shadow gets released from the prison, he meets a man called Wednesday who offers a job (“Call to Adventure”) to Shadow. At first, Shadow refuses to take the job because he still thinks that he will have a job in his home town. However, Shadow learns the fact that he has no job and he does not know what to do with his lonely life (without the company of his wife, Laura), he finally takes the job offered by Wednesday whom could be thought as Shadow’s mentor because Shadow learns many tricks and ways of doing things from him along the journey. Then, Shadow crosses his first threshold at House on the Rock. He enters in a different world by taking that magical merry-go-round with other Gods. As the story continues, Shadow meets with many tests (e.g. fighting with Mad Sweeney), allies (Czernobog, Zorya sisters, Jacquel…), enemies (technology boy, Mr. Town, Mr. Stone, Mr. World).

Later, Shadow suffers from the great pain of the hanging on the tree, keeping the vigil for Wednesday (the Supreme Ordeal) and enters the underworld (led by Zorya and Bast) to have his life judged by Thoth and Jacquel (the Inmost Cave). In the underworld, he also meets with Whiskey Jack and figures out that there is not going to be a battle (the truth as a Reward?) and comes back to the real world to stop the crafty plot by Wednesday and Low Key and further prevents the war from happening. After this whole event, Shadow learns his real identity: a son of God (Resurrection). Does that mean Shadow will lead an immortal life (Elixir)? Though we do not have the absolute answer from the author, the readers are suggested by Gaiman that Shadow might live on for a long time: “He [Shadow] walked away and he kept on walking”.

For shadow, the whole journey is the search for his true self. He has to face the deepest fear in order to be reborn into another individual. To me, Gaiman using the mythic structure and putting different Gods all over the world together is to create a new myth: the born of Shadow (who could be seen as a new God).

The Comparison and Contrast Between Vampires and The Forsaken

2005-12-14T23:02:00.000+08:00

The two films, Vampires and The Forsaken which are both about vampires, have the similar structure: vampires are evil; kill the vampires and hunt them down. The main difference is that the portrayal of vampires. In The Forsaken, vampires dress in modern clothes and act like an ordinary guy. The director breaks the tradition that vampires are ancient and old. He may want to strengthen the creepy feeling that vampires are around us and they hide themselves from the everyday killings which we saw at news. However, this arrangement reduces the horror of vampires because it does not have a strong sense that they are from another world. Moreover, they do not have the power to fly; they have to hire someone to be the driver. To me, vampires, in The Forsaken, behave just like gangsters on the street. Instead, Vampires keeps the tradition that vampires are from ancient times. It remains the sense of mystery (just like Stoker’s Dracula).Moreover, it adds some freshness to the vampires lore. The head of vampires, Jan Valek, is a renegade priest who became the first recorded vampire in history back in the 1300s. Valek becomes the combination of good and evil. In addition, the director adds an interesting point to the vampire lore: vampires try to get the power of living under the sun. However, the plot centers around the hunters, particularly Jack Crow, thus placing the vampires themselves in the background and effectively giving them little depth (it also happens in The Forsaken).

Another major difference is the protagonist (Jack Crow) in Vampires already knows vampires and leads a life to destroy those vampires while the protagonist (Sean) in The Forsaken has no idea about vampires at all. Jack Crow whose job is the vampire slaughter lives in an ordinary world which, on the contrary, is an extraordinary world to us. Sean, on the other hand, has no idea about vampires and then learns about them from another guy. This difference makes The Forsaken surprisingly suspenseful because we do not know how an ordinary person like Sean destroys vampires. It makes the film more fun to watch.

The main similarity is the negative image of woman portrayed in both films. The females are weak, fragile, waiting for the help from males and always linking with desire (in Vampires, the victim is a prostitute; in The Forsaken, we are treated to a scene in which a naked young woman in a shower covered in blood cleans off one of her breasts which makes a link between blood and sex). Also, in both films, we could see that female brings destruction to male. This destruction is much clearer in Vampires: Jack Crow’s partner, Montoya got bitten by her while taking care of her. Thus Montoya’s life is destroyed by that prostitute because Montoya will become a vampire sooner or later. Basically, it is the boys who run the show in these two films: they’re entirely full of violence, explosions, gore, and rude language (especially in Vampires), which makes it an extreme masculine world which excludes any heroine.

Comparison between The Forsaken and John Carpenter's Vampires

2005-12-08T01:34:00.000+08:00

First of all, the remarkable difference between these two films is that in John Carpenter's Vampires the protagonist knows well that people live in a world with vampires, while in The Forsaken the protagonist has to meet someone with special ability or experience of handling with vampires to get to know the fact that vampires do exist in the world. And by knowing the special person the protagonist in The Forsaken is thus be able to cross the first threshold, and enter into the "Special World" from the point of mythic structure.

Secondly, the image of vampires are quite different in the two films. In The Forsaken, they are quite modern. They look like ordinary people. Unlike traditional vampires, they don't fly and move really fast, instead they use things as cars as ordinary people do. In other words, despite the cruel personality and extroadinary strength (without these they would not be called vampires), they look like gangsters. On the other hand, John Carpenter's vampires are much more traditional in their look. They wear cape, and look especially white. They fly, they move really fast. Vampires in these two films are both role of "the other." But the contrast is more clear in John Carpenter's film because they maintain the traditional ability and appearance. In addition to this, the vampire in Vampires attempt to to break the traditional temporal boundary at which they are only allowed to move after night. In the film they try to break the traditional limit by convincing the bishop to complete the unfinish exorcism. John Carpenter's vampire shows strong desire to dominate the world not only by invade the human world secretly, but also aggressively break the vampire traditions.

And another similarity in these two films I'd like to talk about is the female tradition. Apparently we can see that both directors use female character as the victim. By this approach female's weak, gullible, hysteria stereotype is still deeply stressed. The directors do not jump out of the Stoker tradition. Therefore the films still look like two masculine/powerful sides fight for the weak and delicate female. In my opinion, a innovative vampire film will not make a progress and will not develop into new plot structure unless they make changes in the female image.

About Derren Brown's Seance

2005-11-03T07:56:00.000+08:00

What we believe comes from our senses. They are the tools for us to perceive and understand the world: our touch, our sight, our memory. However, the mind could control all these senses and make them lie to us. Derren brown’s show, Séance, is a good example showing that how easily people’s minds can be controlled and manipulated.

Since I am not an expert on magic, hypnosis, influence, dual reality…etc, I’ll just write down my opinions according to my humble thought. First of all, Derren Brown said at the beginning of the show that the participants had been selected based on results of a suggestibility test that a larger group had taken part in. What he had clearly done was to pick the most suggestible people and used his ability to get the result he wanted because the participants are easily influenced and suggested by others (though most of the time I cannot find out his tricks). The only part I could find out and be sure about is how Brown makes almost everyone choose Jane’s picture. What he did is to put the photos in a special arrangement. By following Brown’s instruction on choosing a photo, one must get to Jane’s picture at the end. That’s for sure because I tried to start with different photos and get the same result (those who did not choose Jane just missed Brown’s instruction).

As for the woman who threw the tambourine, she must have either been hypnotized previously (and to her, the signal to throw the tambourine is when Brown closed the curtain heavily) or simply an actor. The case of the conscious man, who was screaming when the papers were thrust out of the curtain, is similar. Then, Derren Brown makes a girl choose the room which is coincidentally “Jane’s room”. Here, my explanation is this: Jane’s room is at the end of the corridor; therefore, while Brown asks her to look at, feel every room and choose a room she has feelings for, she must look through all the rooms and get to the last one which is Jane’s room to show that she indeed checks all the rooms. Moreover, Brown keeps saying “feels every room, look at them carefully…” while the girl walks by the rooms. Then, Brown seems to stop talking when the girl stands in front of the right room. Suddenly the girl could not hear Brown. This short silence would make her feel isolated and helpless. Therefore, she immediately makes the decision that this is the room she wants so that she could get the response from Brown again quickly.

The two girls who both mention London while doing the automatic writing exercise puzzle me. The only explanation I could think of is that London is the place where this séance takes place; therefore, it is natural for them to think of London subconsciously. Moreover, while Brown describes this “fake” suicide pact to them, he mentions about London several times; the word, “London” (which is the only city mentioned during the séance) had already been rooted in their mind (just like when you ask a person not think of a “black dog”, the words, “black dog” is already in the sentence and the person cannot get away with the words). Here, he uses the technique which many psychics would use: “cold reading”. He reads the information to these total strangers like reading the news without any emotion revealed. That would make them believe what they hear (believing that there was really a suicide pact). Brown could manipulate their minds by using his authority with his “cold reading” because people always believe the authority.

Then the group is taken to a small room where they would have séance. There, the group tried to contact the spirit on a Ouiji board. Some of the group members then put their fingers on the glass in the middle and asked to think of the student they picked in the earlier photo session. Of course they all think of Jane. Therefore, they “unconsciously” move their fingers to the letters which spell “JANE” since they are asked not to move their fingers. As for the latter part that the bell rings, the ball flies and the cup falls down, to me, they are what a magician could do. To me, those are magic tricks. Then, one of the group members, again a girl, was put into trance and was going to be the medium to channel the spirit of Jane and talks about a cat called “Harry” which is exactly the information from the letter about Jane. How could she possibly know that? I cannot find a good explanation to that. This is the most shocking part to me. Just like at the very beginning, when Brown asks everyone to think of a dead beloved, he could tell that one girl is thinking of her grandma; moreover, he knows her grandma is called “Laura.” Here, it seems to me that Brown uses the technique “cold reading” again. He tells the subjects nothing, but makes guesses, put out suggestions, and ask questions in order to get the information he want from the subject. But how could he know the exact name? (maybe he read through all the files of each student).

In conclusion, I really can not explain all these weird stuff without assuming that some of the group members were plants (actors). Brown uses those actors to influence others. However, Brown himself has already said that the participants are not actors. If so, Derren Brown really rocks. He cleverly manipulates them and plays off their fear and makes them think or act irrationally. Derren Brown is an expert at planting ideas in peoples subconscious. If I really could find out all his tricks used in the show, I would be a magician myself.

Power of Mind -- A Critique of Derren Brown's Seance

2005-11-03T03:20:00.000+08:00

We are apt to regard things as supernatural when we cannot explain them. There are always natural things or phenomena that are misunderstood by us because of our insufficient knowledge. However, I would not say that the supernatural things we've taken for granted so far are all "natural" things at all. But it is clear that a lot of "supernatural" things have been found out not supernatural but natural things with the change of time and the progress of scientific technology. For instance, that a corpse can move does not indicate it is a zombie, but that the muscle of the joint of a dead body still works if receiving external excitement.Although I cannot give every evidence to prove everything in the video is manipulation, I will try to point out the possible tricks he employs to manipulate the mind.

In Darren Brown's video clip of Seance, it is obvious that Brown manipulates the power of language and of the mind to create an eerie atmosphere throughout the whole video clip. First of all, in the beginning of the show, Brown tells a female student information of her grandmother. It is, in fact, a skill called "cold reading." "Cold reading," according to the Skeptic Dictionary online (http://skepdic.com), it "refers to a set of techniques used by professional manipulators to get a subject to behave in a certain way or to think that the cold reader has some sort of special ability that allows him to 'mysteriously' know things about the subject." And it is actually not "mysterious" at all because sometimes cold reading manipulates a skill that is similar to the ones that is used in horoscope. A horoscope or cold reading may tell you about your "private" information by telling you some features, but the features are not unique at all, and may happen to anyone, like: "you may not be good at your health this week. Be aware of the food and take more exercise." People who have the habit reading horoscope in newspaper or magazine are very likely to believe in this because the selectivity of the human mind is always at work. We pick and choose what information we will remember and what we think are really of significance. In part, we do so because of what we already believe or want to believe. In part, we do so in order to make sense out of what we are experiencing.

Secondly, he fabricated a story of "a bizarre suicide pact" of twelve students to create the primary frightening atmosphere throughout the seance. By convincing them that there was an accident happened in the very place they hold seance, Brown actually put psychological pressure on the students' mind, which is crucial to make his tricks appear to more true and persuasive. To persuade the students and prove to them that the fear that is fabricated is true, Brown leads them to follow his instruction to pick out the picture of the "dead." And that is actually a command rather than instruction to pick out the only one picture, which is Jane. Following instructions to the letter, one will find it’s just a pattern whereby wherever one starts; one ends up in the same place because of the layout. Brown actually uses very suggestive instructions like "move along the line until you find the color photo that strikes you the most...keep going, keep going, move along the line until you find the one color photo that attracts you the most..." And it is obvious to me whenever I repeat watching that part of video clip that unless one does not follow or gets confused with Brown’s instructions, that the picture of Jane is always the only one where I have to follow along a line of other black and white photos to get to her colored one.

Thirdly, after the name "Jane" is picked out by most of the students, Brown moves on his next trick -- glass moving. In this part, Brown tells the three students not to move the glass, but either don't stop it from moving, and the glass does start moving. This is actually similar to the movement when we play xanadu. We consciously tell ourself don't control the object we are grasping, but unconsciously we do control it with our intention. In the video, under the frightening atmosphere and after experiencing Brown's incredible "supernatural" ability, the three students tend to move the glass to "y" when Brown asks them if there is a spirit. Furthermore, when they "confirm" that there is a spirit. It is natural for them that they'd unconsciously indicate the name of the spirit is "Jane" with most of their choices are Jane in the previous activity. By this action, the students only fall into Brown's psychological trap deeper, not knowing they are manipulated by the tricks.

If the video clip creeps you out, it is just that you're ignorant of the mysterious of your own mind. Think logically before things that are labelled "supernatural."

Movie Trailer Remixing . . . . . . Reworking Old Movies . . . . . . transforming them into something they ain't

2005-10-14T21:42:00.000+08:00

Crossposting from Life of Brian . . .okay, this is just weirdness. It seems to have suddenly become a bit of a trend in that old movie trailers are being reworked into something they aren't. Here is a bit of off center strange, a very scary movie becomes a happy happy joy joy fest while a musical delight is transformed into a rather cliched bit of zombie outbreak scariness.

I remember seeing The Shining when it first came out in 1980 and I remember being terrified out of my wits and unable to sleep for quite some time. Well, with a bit of clever editing and new music, the trailer is remixed into a delightful family movie. Watch this video clip and wonder . . . really wonder. Of course, this new film Shining may seem like a feel good bit of fluff but as we recognize so many of the shots as coming from scary scenes from the original, the transformation is incomplete. This is scary stuff, even when it's not. See more discussion at John Moore's Brand Autopsy, a link I ganked from The Taipei Kid.

Another classic film being reworked into something it totally is not of late is West Side Story which I couldn't see when it first came out in 1961 as I wasn't even born yet. However, I saw it a million times on television growing up. It is a musical with some dark elements and some delightful moments and most certainly is NOT a scary horror suspense thing about an infection that turns people into mindless zombies. Really, it just isn't that sort of a movie. Except . . . thanks to the thrills of filmic remixing, the trailer has been reworked to appear to be just that sort of a film. See the new trailer here. That's some scary reworking. See more discussion on Seth Godin's Blog. What does this sort of thing mean? Nothing much, other than someone wants to play with theme, music, and cutting. It is a delightful twist on an old song, so to speak.

Now, I'm curious to see when we're going to see the Batman and Robin trailer remixed so it appears to be a delightful romantic comedy about a love triangle in which a girl loves a boy who loves a boy who loves a boy with another girl in love with the the other boy but who is loved by yet another girl who is friends to a guy who is a closet necrophiliac. Oh, I guess that is what that movie was about . . . well, except for the delightful part . . . uh, so nevermind.

Review of "Shaun of the Dead"

2005-10-13T17:48:00.000+08:00

The experience of seeing the film "Shaun of the Dead" would've been very different if one had not known the title of it (as I did). The setting which is very much like our daily life hardly causes suspect of horror element in it. Or, in other words I may have to say, a successful horror film should keep its audiences in a familiar setting and not let them smell the odor of blood from the very beginning to prepare a space to give them a big shock, frightening them to the edge of seat by their very understanding of familar "reality."

The atmosphere at the start in the bar is funny, which makes it look like a soap opera like "Friend" or "Seinfield." However, from the beginning eerie "hints" or foreshadowing can be noticed if watching meticulously. Shaun and his flatmate, Ed's life styles look very like "living deads;" the throng on the street and bus fling their arms with torpid looks in their face are like walking deads. And Shuan and Ed live among them, and they ignore the creepiness. At this point of plot, I started to doubt whether the people are genuine human beings, or they are the symbols of members in a zombified society. I tended to regard that as the later because that makes a good exaggerated example of the condition in a post-modern world in which human beings live sluggishly and mechanically. And it was not until later in the movie that I realized it WAS a zombie movie. Moreover, the recurrent reminders "You've got red on you" from other characters to Shaun are significant implications indicating something ominous is imminent. The "red, "which symbolized blood, later not only on Shaun's shirt, but everywhere in the town.

From a Freudian view, I think the movie succeeds in making uncanny feelings at two points. The first is , as I said, the director makes a familiar setting, too familiar to tell which kind of movie it is if not knowing the title. The zombifying throng may be a metaphor for the machine-like society in a over-industrialized age, or it is, as the movie, the invasion of the zombie mobs. Freud says in his essay "Uncanny" that "[t]he imaginary writer has this license among many others, that he can select his world of representation so that it either coincides with the realities we are familiar with or departs from them in what particulars he pleases. We accept his ruling in every case" (Freud, 950). In the movie the writer apparently moulds a setting that "coincides with the realities we are familiar with." So when I found myself feeling uncanny, it derived from the oscillation between regarding the men as the exaggeration form of mechanical life AND a real walking dead, zombie. The second point I notice is that, as Freud mentions, something too familiar will cause unfamiliar feelings on one's mind, as "something which ought to have remained hidden but has come to light" (944). The example I will take is Shuan's yawning and stretching his arms and legs. Both his voice and movement are very like a zombie arising from earch and which has raised doubt in me: "Do I look like that too when I yawn?" or "we seem to be really like that when when we mechanically get up and start another new day." The yawning action is so familiar to us, but it is now added something unfamiliar and thus causes an eerie feeling.

To sum up this movie, I'd say that this film is worthy seeing because it is so realistic that it not only raises the uncanny feeling but presents a zombie movie without valor heroes or magic. It realistically presents a group of people's reaction when they really encounter zombies -- not thousands of bullets or holy water, but throwing records to try to kill a zombie and keeping fleeing, hiding. Realistic in causing uncanny feeling and unexaggerated human reaction and action are what I think the very brilliant part of this movie.

Work Cited:

Freud, Sigmund. "The Uncanny." Trans. Alix Strachey. The Norton Anthology Theory
and Criticism. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch, William E. Cain, Laurie Finke, Barbara Johnson, John
McGowan, Jeffrey J. Williams. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2001. 929-952.

Little review on Shaun of the Dead

2005-10-12T23:24:00.000+08:00

Shaun of the Dead is probably the best Zombie movie I’ve seen recent years. The main character, as the title tells us, is Shaun, a 29-year-old slacker working in an electronics store with a bunch of teenagers and spends his nights at the Winchester Tavern, getting drunk with his buddy Ed, who is also crashing at his place, and his girlfriend Liz, who finally wears out her patience for Shaun.
One night, when Shaun fails to make proper dinner plans her girlfriend asked, and Liz dumps him out, Shaun and Ed go to the Winchester again to get away their sorrows by drinking beers. The next morning, a severely hangover Shaun walks to a nearby convenience store where he used to go without even noticing the carnage around him that has been caused by the walking dead. The strangeness already happened in Shaun’s used-to-be ordinary life. He still takes everything for granted without paying attention to the small changes happening in his life. To Shaun, every day is the same and his life is going nowhere (just like the zombie). When he gets back to his house, Shaun and Ed finally figure out that these pale-faced creatures are not just drunk, but are actually deadly zombies. After some failed attempts to dispel them by throwing bad records and other such household objects at them (yes, they do not have guns, bombs, or whatever…), Shaun takes up a cricket bat, and Ed a shovel, and the two of them start their job: whacking zombies. Then, Shaun comes up with a plan (well, actually, many plans). It's not the best plan in the world of course, but nobody else seems to have better ideas. Here, what lends to the comedy, and also to the interesting dynamic, is that the cast is made up exclusively of normal people. No cops, not any security guards; no one with martial training. When Shaun's gang finally gets their hands on a gun, none of them can hit a thing with it immediately. Moreover, they fight and backbite, and while Shaun does rise to the occasion, he is far from perfect. That is the main reason why I feel so much for these characters: they are just normal human beings and we DO care about them. When these people we know from the start turn into zombies, it gives us the strongest uncanny feelings. One we are familiar with turns into strangeness. They have the outlook we are familiar with but are zombies (and the whole society is surrounded by zombies; not those people we know anymore).
Finally, the ending of the story further suggests one thing: do not sit at home like a brainless zombie. Do not make yourself into a brainless zombie in your own life (though Shaun and Liz seem to go back to the boring ordinary life again).

Literature of the Fantastic . . . . . . graduate seminar

2005-09-29T09:54:00.000+08:00

This semester, I am teaching a graduate seminar in literature of the fantastic . . . the graduate students will join us here . . . Realms of Fantasy and Science Fiction.

- Brian

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

2005-07-17T17:03:00.000+08:00

Well . . . I've been waiting to see The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy for a loooooong time . . . been watching for the news ever since Douglas Adams announced it was go . . . love the novels, teach 'em in my Science Fiction courses at the university (both undergraduate and graduate levels) . . . it is sad that Adams never got to see the final result . . . but it's a nice film and does indeed capture both the spirit and the context of the series.

One can't really compare the film to the old television series or even the radio series . . . the media and the times are so very different.

There are bits here and there that I prefer from the older pieces but there are other bits that I find delightful in the film. Obviously, the film had more money and better special effects . . . much stronger product but the others are safe within their proper context.

The love story between Arthur and Trillian is pretty much film-only and can be understood in that context. I like the film's Marvin . . . really . . . well done . . . the original Marvin does have a cameo in the film though and that was rather cute.

Missed Milliway's but it makes sense to cut it. Looking forward with the hope for sequels . . . albeit, I doubt it will happen.

Here in Taiwan the film opened this week across from Madagascar with War of the Worlds still doing a lot of business so while it appeared that Hitchhiker's had a good crowd, it seemed to mostly be folks who couldn't get into the other films.

I had been anticipating the film so much that I actually positively hallucinated seeing an ad for it on the side of Taipei 101 (turned out to be a billboard for a watch company, go figure).

Regretted not having my towell with me for the film (had meant to bring one) but while they mentioned the need for one, the film characters don't explain the why of it . . . odd bit that.

Yes, there is an anaglyphic 3D shot in the film (the holographic head with the missiles) . . . I brought cardboard anaglyph glasses for everyone in our party . . . the kids got a kick out of it . . . even if it was just for one very short scene. Nifty.

War of the Worlds . . . . . . a novel comes to life transformed

2005-07-15T10:48:00.000+08:00

I wasn't really sure what to expect with War of the Worlds . . . usually Tom Cruise big budget films are well worth seeing . . . full of action and dynamic plotlines that captivate . . . while I may not seem to be much of a fan of Cruise, given some of his . . . eccentric and closeted . . . behaviors and beliefs . . . but, I am a fan of his acting . . . he is an example of someone who starts out young with a lot of promise, an actor who because of box office constraints is transformed into a movie star and not allowed to act anymore.

Dakota Fanning is a wonderful child actress. She has not disappointed yet. It will be interesting to see how she turns out . . . will the bright child be able to blossom into an adult worthy of her promise or will success squash her spirit or will she be led down paths that are twisted and dark and self-destructive like so many youngster celebrities have been torn into before?

Neither here nor there though.

I anticipated and dreaded the coming of War of the Worlds . . . I love the novel . . . big time. I have been teaching The Time Machine by H.G. Wells to undergraduate and graduate students of my various Science Fiction and Fantasy courses and seminars for years and will continue doing so. It is pretty much the first novel to sit squarely within the genre of science fiction, the benchmark from which all else comes. Now, it looks like I can add War of the Worlds to my course. Happily.

When novels are adapted to film, there are three possible levels of adaptation . . . literal in which everything in the film is exactly the same as the novel, faithful in which most things are the same but some have been changed but the film is pretty much an attempt to capture the spirit and content of the novel, and loose in which very little from the original survives to the screen.

When the publicity for War of the Worlds began coming out, it looked like it was going to be a very loose adaptation that only had an idea and a name in common with the original.

Not the case . . . the film . . . while very loose . . . captures the concepts and spirit of the novel . . . an average man and his experience . . . by taking the story into our contemporary age, much has been changed but the spirit is there and some of the original story can still be recognized with interesting twists . . . the brother is mentioned but the character is pretty much changed into the role of the son. The guy in the cellar is a composite of two characters. Actually, much of what reviewers have complained about the film . . . the deus ex machina ending that seems to come out of nowhere and leaves us a little disappointed at the lack of action on the part of man comes from the novel albeit one can't help but wonder if it could have been presented a bit less abruptly with perhaps a few more signs to go on.

In any case . . . it is truly a wonderful film. Scary . . . very much so . . . albeit, I didn't feel as engrossed in the reality of the machines as some reviewers have said, felt a bit bluescreenish to me but still very very good bluescreenish.

My daughter . . . a fifth grader . . . was engrossed, she found it scary as well, very scary . . . but not in a bad way . . . more of in the on-the-edge-of-my-seat way . . . it was truly an exhilirating experience well worth the time.

Fantastic Four . . .. . . just what it needs to be . . .. . . science fiction comic book movie

2005-07-15T10:09:00.000+08:00

The Fantastic Four was one of my early comic book favorites. I have always been fond of the series . . . and used to collect anything and everything I could find by the late master artist Jack "King" Kirby (co-creator of the series with Stan "The Man" Lee). So, this series has a special place in my memories of youth . . . despite having long ago been replaced by other titles as my favorite.

The new film adaptation is right on the money as far as the tone and feel and context of the piece. It is less serious than many other recent comic book adaptations to the silver screen but it is nevertheless very very good as simple entertainment. No angst like Spiderman and no self-loathing as in Batman but neither is it simply cardboard cutouts.

I really liked the balance between pathos and comedy with the Ben Grimm (The Thing) character. It captured the serious elements of the comic book as well as the comedic touch. It was nice to hear "It's clobberin' time!" as well.

Lorraine and I saw the film in Warner Village in Taipei with out daughter who has no grounding in American comic books beyond the few films that have shown here. However, she loved the animated film The Incredibles and so has at least been introduced to some of the concepts. In fact, a little boy shouted out in the theatre (in Chinese) that the film was just like a live version of The Incredibles which obviously excited him quite a bit . . . the audience roared with laughter at that moment of epiphany for the child).

It was interesting to see how they were handling Dr. Doom's origin alongside that of the FF. The evil Doctor is not a nice guy . . . not in the least . . . but he is a fan favorite. Long ago, when dinosaurs walked the Earth and I was at university for my BA, a buddy of mine did a "Three Doctors" poster illustration for me where he took my favorite science fiction doctors and did female versions of them based upon Playboy centerfolds . . . Doctor Who, Doctor Strange, and Doctor Doom. Wish I still had that . . . probably do back in the States buried under long forgotten books and papers in Mom's closets somewhere.

In any case, don't expect Fantastic Four to be heavy drama or great cinema . . . it is escapist entertainment and it is just right for that. Enjoy.

Back in th Saddle!

2005-03-24T17:47:00.000+08:00

Been awhile, but it's time for this blog to get back in business . . . so Realms of Fantasy and Science Fiction . . . is now open for business again. I will contact the other authors and tell them to start posting . . . again. - Brian

LotR . . . and religion

2004-02-21T23:46:00.000+08:00

There is an interesting essay on LorR at Celestial Fire: "LOTR Interpretation"

Star Trek Enterprise

2004-02-13T17:33:00.000+08:00

A recent article in Starlog discusses Enterprise, the newest series in the Star Trek franchise, as if it were on its last legs. According to the article, the series hasn't received much in the way of positive reviews and is seen as a weak addition to the Star Trek Universe.

I disagree. I have enjoyed the show thoroughly - even with the questionable "at any costs" military theme of the current season (obviously influenced by current American political and cultural pressures).

I have found the rougher, looser, pre-Original Series Enterprise to be entertaining and fascinating. It's nice to see the early history of the Federation unfold and to see a Captain who isn't bound by the Prime Directive as Kirk was or who isn't quite so moral and virtuous as Pickard was or who doesn't have a whole history of right and proper action to guide him as Janeway did.

Archer is less the position and more a regular man caught in extraordinary circumstances.

Of course . . . as with many Trekkers, I love Vulcans (when I was a kid, some of my friends called me Spock) and I think T'Pol is pretty much the best Vulcan we've seen on the series in a long time . . . and I'm not just saying that because she's incredibly attractive. Spock represented the inward battle of his human emotional and Vulcan logical sides while T'Pol demonstrates that not all Vulcans are without feeling. Tuvok was rational and certainly loving - well, as loving as a Vulcan could be anyway - and he was a wonderful mentor (some day I will write about the various trance techniques and guided imageries used in the Voyager series as they're wonderful, many of them were employed by Tuvok). T'Pol, like her human companions in the current series, is less cultivated and a bit rougher around the edges.

The folks of Enterprise live in a rougher edgier world, not as clean or as sanitary or as sophisticated as the world of Picard and Janeway and even rougher than that of Kirk. It is a series that hails back to what Gene Roddenberry created oh so many years ago, a science fiction series that could comment upon contemporary issues and it does that.

While others have criticised the new series as it doesn't have the sophistication or polish of The Next Generation . . . I disagree, it's rougher and more human and reflects more of today's issues . . . and shows us that we can find a good heart and we can keep our values while facing circumstances that seem overwhelming . . . while Archer has certainly failed a few times, he has lived with his mistakes and has continued to learn from them, setting a course toward establishing what we already know will be Rennaissance . . . but it has to start as the alchemists made their gold, from the rough beginnings.

Don't get me wrong, there are certainly parts of Enterprise I don't like - as a viewer and a fan. I get annoyed by the Temporal War as it's a plot that does nothing for me in its execution. I wish we'd see the marines more as they were introduced and now rarely show up - it was a big deal that they joined the mission so where are they most of the time? I wish someone in the Star Trek universe would realize that sending chief officers alone into dangerous circumstances is a pretty bad idea. At least in the original series we had Red Shirts but now nobody dies, they just roll around a bit in the dust and then fire back in a one-in-a-million show of skill or luck and survive. Of course, it may be rougher but it's still Star Trek.

I like the series. I hope it continues . . . for a long time . . . or at least for a "five year mission to boldly go where no human has gone before."

Underworld . . . gothic punk a la Foucault

2004-02-10T23:23:00.000+08:00

Underworld is a wonderful film that tells the story of a secret war between vampires and werewolves that has raged for centuries. It is predominately high action but the subtext fits the gothic punk genre to a tea - secret supernatural menace living cloaked in darkness, angst, and the rest.

I have posted about this before at Life of Brian but it bears noting here.

One of my graduate students, Beatrix Wang, had some excellent comments in my Graduate Seminar in Contemporary Literary Theory and Criticism class about the film Underworld in terms of the theories of Michel Foucault.

She noted that we can consider the film and the revision of history within it as a reflection of Foucault's early theories - particularly the mandate from Viktor that the vampires were not allowed to discuss the history of the Vampire-Lycan war. She went on to discuss other parts of the film in terms of Foucault's later ideas.

All in all, she had some excellent comments and insights . . . many of which . . . really some top-notch ideas that bear further exploration.

Some Thoughts on The Lord of the Rings Films

2004-02-10T23:18:00.000+08:00

There is a discussion of the film trilogy of The Lord of the Rings at Life of Brian including bits on cinema greatness, homoeroticism in the films and novels, and a bit on racism in the story and film.

Paycheck

2004-02-04T15:15:00.000+08:00

Paycheck is another big budget Hollywood blockbuster based upon a Philip K. Dick short story. While the film itself is entertaining, it just doesn't work as well as other pieces adapted from Dick's fiction such as Minority Report or the classic Bladerunner.

I am constantly in awe that producers would choose Philip K. Dick stories to adapt to the screen. They are often very esoteric and philosophical in nature which is difficult to translate into film and they are not heavy on action in and of themselves.

Hollywood solves these problems by shifting the focus of the stories from the philosophical or introspective nature of identity, fate, or humanity into an outward or goal-based plot, often with contrived action. The root or core of the story is there but it has been changed to such a degree that the resulting film, while very entertaining and full of action, has very little to do with the source fiction.

Personally, I found Bladerunner much more entertaining than the Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? novella . . . but, that could just be me.

2004-01-28T21:34:00.000+08:00

Welcome to the Realms of Fantasy and Science Fiction. This online resource has been created by the Fantasy and Science Fiction Research Group. While we are an international group with a wide variety of interests, our work is based within the English Department at National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.