From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom
THE MT VOID
04/03/26 -- Vol. 44, No. 40, Whole Number 2426
Editor: Evelyn Leeper,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
All material is the opinion of the author and is copyrighted by
the author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
The latest issue is at <
http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm>.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at <
http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm>.
Topics:
Mini Reviews, Part 11 (IT HAPPENED IN BROOKLYN,
The Marx Brothers Films, THE TV SET) (film reviews
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Ray Harryhausen Films, Part 08 (THE ANIMAL WORLD,
THE STRANGE WORLD OF PLANET X) (film comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
RABBIT TEST AND OTHER STORIES by Samantha Mills
(book review by Joe Karpierz)
ALIEN EARTHS by Lisa Kaltenegger (book review
by Gregory Frederick)
DUNE MESSIAH (letter of comment by Steve Coltrin)
This Week's Reading (Orwell's Essays: "Review of TOLSTOY:
HIS LIFE AND WORK by Derrick Leon" [but really a
discussion of book prices over the years],
and "Are Books Too Dear?") (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Mini Reviews, Part 11 (film reviews by Evelyn C. Leeper)
IT HAPPENED IN BROOKLYN (1947): Frank Sinatra, Peter Lawford,
William Roy, and Kathryn Grayson all play characters who have
dreams of being successful in music (as singer, composer, pianist,
and opera singer). Sinatra, Lawford, and Roy all achieve their
goals. We see Grayson sing an aria from "Lakme" in a dream
sequence, and then she goes off the England to marry Lawford and
eventually to be a duchess.
Pardon me while I go throw up.
(Oh, and I was sure that it would turn out that Leo was 17 rather
than 16-1/2, but that his mother had lied about his birthday
because she hadn't been married when she got pregnant. But I
forgot about the Hays Code--no chance of that.)
Released theatrically 07 April 1947.
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039501/reference>
What others are saying: <
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/it_happened_in_brooklyn>
The Marx Brothers Films: I just watched TCM's New Year's Eve Marx
Brothers marathon, and my personal opinion is that while there are
a few funny bits, I find the films (and the Marx Brothers
themselves) more obnoxious than funny (except for Zeppo, who is
neither obnoxious nor funny). I know things were different then,
but much of Groucho's and Harpo's "humor" seems to involved
assaulting women, and Chico's is based on negative ethnic
stereotypes. I suppose this makes me "woke" or a "radical leftist
liberal" or something, but it is what it is.
I'm not going to list the reference URLs et al for all the movies,
but I will list the films shown, in chronological order:
THE COCOANUTS (1929)
ANIMAL CRACKERS (1930)
MONKEY BUSINESS (1931)
HORSE FEATHERS (1932)
DUCK SOUP (1933)
A NIGHT AT THE OPERA (1935)
A DAY AT THE RACES (1937)
ROOM SERVICE (1938)
AT THE CIRCUS (1939)
THE TV SET (2006): In the syntax of the "elevator pitch" THE TV
SET is "THE BIG PICTURE meets NETWORK", but not as good as either.
At times painful to watch, it can easily be skipped in favor of
the other two. (And the commentaries consist of people spending a
lot of time joking with each other and not providing very more
information, either.)
Released theatrically 28 April 2006.
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0473709/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tv_set>
[-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Ray Harryhausen Films, Part 08 (film comments by Evelyn
C. Leeper)
THE ANIMAL WORLD (1956): THE ANIMAL WORLD is a film remembered for
one ten-minute sequence. A history of all life on earth, the film
begins with prehistoric life. But since the filmmakers could not
film actual prehistoric life, they called on Ray Harryhausen to
re-create various dinosaurs. Most of them are from the Late
Jurassic, but the final battle is between two dinosaurs of the
Late Cretaceous.
Of course, in 1956, we didn't know as much about dinosaurs, and
their era, as we do now. The narration gives three possible
reasons for the dinosaurs disappearing: a cooling off of the
climate, the dinosaur's lack of "mother love" for their children,
and volcanic activity. The sequence opts for the last, with the
final battle between two Tyrannosauri reges (Tyrannosaur rexes to
the non-Classical among you) and a triceratops ending when they
fall off a cliff weakened by the movement of the earth from
volcanic activity and are buried in hot lava.
The argument about "mother love" makes no sense. The dinosaurs
were around for millions of years, with various species dying off
and being replaced over that time, and then suddenly not being
replaced; why would they suddenly all die off from lack of mother
love? Of course, now we are reasonably sure that it was a
variation of the cooling off of the climate, because of a giant
meteor impact.
They also show what they say might have happened if humans and
dinosaurs lived at the same time, except that they have a
brontosaurus eat a human. Brontosauri (again, brontosauruses for
the non-Classical) were vegetarian.
And they describe the stegosaurus as having a gentle nature. How
do they know?
As for Harryhausen's work, this was his first film in color and he
does not seem to have gotten the surface texture and color quite
right. All the dinosaurs look shiny, and not scaly. Compare this
to Willis O'Brien's models in the black-and-white KING KONG
(1933), which have exteriors that look quite realistic, or the
prehistoric creatures in the earlier, black-and-white Harryhausen
films.
There are also too many camera shots aimed directly into
dinosaurs' mouths, which look particularly unrealistic, being far
less detailed that they would be in real life.
The actual stop motion is decent, though not up to that which
Harryhausen would produce in his later films for Charles Schneer.
Released theatrically 30 May 1956; the prehistoric segment is
available on YouTube.
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048950/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_animal_world>
THE STRANGE WORLD OF PLANET X (and other titles) (1958): This is a
confusing film, at least title-wise.
In THROUGH THE LOOKING-GLASS, the Knight tells Alice about a song:
"Or else it doesn't, you know. The name of the song is called
'Haddocks' Eyes'."
"Oh, that's the name of the song, is it?" Alice said, trying to
feel interested.
"No, you don't understand," the Knight said, looking a little
vexed.
"That's what the name is called. The name really is 'The Aged Aged
Man'."
"Then I ought to have said 'That's what the song is called'?"
Alice corrected herself.
"No, you oughtn't: that's quite another thing! The song is called
'Ways And Means': but that's only what it's called, you know!"
"Well, what is the song, then?" said Alice, who was by this time
completely bewildered.
"I was coming to that," the Knight said. "The song really is
'A-sitting On A Gate': and the tune's my own invention."
Why am I telling you this? Well, I'm going to talk about a film
that it is rumored that Ray Harryhausen worked on.
The British title of this film is "The Strange World of Planet X".
The title the film was advertised under in the United States was
"Cosmic Monsters".
The title on the film itself was "The Cosmic Monster".
The title it was reviewed under in "Film Daily" was "The Crawling
Terror".
And the real question is whether Ray Harryhausen worked on this
film. He is not credited, and Bill Warren (usually comprehensive)
say nothing about it, not even that there is a rumor. Yet I have
heard this rumor in multiple places.
Almost all the "giant bug" effects are from macro-photography, and
the few that appear to be stop-motion may actually be mechanical.
(They only last a few seconds at a time.)
My conclusion: The rumor that Harryhausen worked on this is false.
This does seem to have the distinction of being the only British
"giant insect" film of the 1950s, and also a strange combination
of "giant insect" movie and "alien from outer space" movie. It's
also very sexist (no surprise for 1958).
Released theatrically 31 December 1958.
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051020/reference>
What others are saying: <
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/strange_world_of_planet_x> <
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cosmic_monsters>
[-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: RABBIT TEST AND OTHER STORIES by Samantha Mills (copyright
2026, Tachyon Publications, publication date April 21, 2026, ISBN: 978-1-61696-451-1 (print); 978-1-61696-453-5 (digital)), (book
review by Joe Karpierz)
Like many genre readers, my first encounter with a Samantha Mills
work was her award-winning short story "Rabbit Test", published in
2022. It wasn't that story, however, that made me pick up her 2024
novel THE WINGS UPON HER BACK. It was the premise and description
alone that made me want to read that book, and it was an excellent
one. But Mills generally flies under my radar, since most of what
she's written is short fiction, and I tend to float in the
direction of novels. However, when the opportunity to read her
debut collection RABBIT TEST AND OTHER STORIES presented itself, I
decided it was time to jump right in.
Those readers who are familiar with Mills' work will nod their
head sagely when I say that she does not limit herself to one type
of story, one genre, one theme, one anything. In many cases in
this collection, there is more than one element that makes up the
tale. There may be a mixture of sf and fantasy, and a dollop of
horror thrown in (I'll get to that shortly). There are elements of
family, loss, emotional strife, and all sorts of things in these
stories all at once. As a result, the reader is constantly kept on
their toes, as it isn't necessarily clear what's going to happen
next, and if it is, it's not clear how Mills is going to take us
there.
There is a slew of terrific stories here. "Kiki Hernandez Beats
the Devil" combines fantasy (and a wee bit of horror) with rock
and roll to tell the tail of a rock guitar queen who can slay
devils with her guitar playing. Mills references classic rock
songs from my youth as weapons for Hernandez to use when she is
slaying a particular devil to save a father and his child (who
steals the show, in my opinion). I'm a sucker for straightforward
stories that are simple and to the point, although I'm sure that
Mills would say "but wait, I was really trying to say ..." and
maybe she was. But it's the guitars, devils, and rock and roll
that stole my heart here.
Whether you think of time travel as fantasy or science fiction--my
vote is for the popular marketing term of "science fantasy",
although I think that having to put that kind of label on
something takes the fun and wonder of it (or not; your mileage may vary)--"Strange Waters" is an enthralling story of a
time-traveling fisher woman (man? sometimes the correct term
escapes me) who travels through the time streams on her fishing
boat looking to get back to her own time to see her family. It's a
very touching and emotional story.
"Anchorage" is a science fictional story about a space ship which
encounters a device called an anchorage. Most members of the crew
of the ship are reluctant to enter the anchorage and discover who
or what is there, but those that do discover that the entity that
is there is looking only for stories, and in return it provides
something that was unexpected. "Adrianna In Pomegranate" is the
story of a father who uses magic to try to bring his deceased
daughter back to life. This story is as old as the hills, but
Mills manages to make it much more emotional and devastating than
any other version of it that I have read in a long time.
The centerpiece of the collection is, of course, "Rabbit Test",
the devastating tale of women seeking abortions throughout history
and how society has almost always made it difficult to safely have
the procedure. This story, which won more awards than I can
count--and deservedly so --was timely when it was published, and
the closing line is bone-chilling. It is Mills at the top of her
game.
Other favorites are "A Shadow Is a Memory of a Ghost", about the
conflict between two sisters with regard to the inherited family
duty to care for souls unwilling to cross over to the next side.
The award for the Best Short Story Title in the collection is "10
Visions of the Future; or, Self-Care for the End of Days", about a
couple dealing with a Hellgate off the coast of California. There
is a Lovecraftian tone to it, which shows that Mills can indeed
dig into horror without it being too...horrific.
As with most collections, not all the stories here are for
everyone, and that's okay. Mills exhibits a vast and dynamic range
of storytelling that is impressive, which means there is something
here for everyone. Which means everyone should get a copy and read
it. I recommend it. [-jak]
[Why not just go with "fisher"? -ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: ALIEN EARTHS: THE NEW SCIENCE OF PLANET HUNTING IN THE
COSMOS by Lisa Kaltenegger (book review by Gregory Frederick)
ALIEN EARTHS: THE NEW SCIENCE OF PLANET HUNTING IN THE COSMOS is a
popular science book about the search for life beyond Earth.
Author Lisa Kaltenegger, an astrophysicist and director of the
Carl Sagan Institute, guides readers through how scientists detect
exoplanets and evaluate whether they might be habitable. This book
makes complex science accessible because Kaltenegger breaks down
topics like exoplanets, atmospheres, and the "Goldilocks zone"
into understandable terms. Even when scientific terminology
appears, it's presented in a "digestible format" for general
readers. You don't need a science background and concepts build
gradually from simple to complex. The book combines astronomy,
biology, chemistry, and geology showing how all are needed to
define "life" and detect it remotely. The author even talks about
science fiction books, TV shows and films that have used star
systems in their stories which we are currently studying today as
places where exoplanets exist. This interdisciplinary approach is
one of the book's most interesting aspects. [-gf]
===================================================================
TOPIC: DUNE MESSIAH (letter of comment by Steve Coltrin)
In response to Paul S. R. Chisholm's comments on DUNE MESSIAH in
the 03/27/26 issue of the MT VOID, Steve Coltrin writes:
[Paul S. R. Chisholm writes,] "(Really, could none of these
meetings have been an email?)"
Well, no, they couldn't. Butlerian Jihad and all that. [-sc]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
"Review of TOLSTOY: HIS LIFE AND WORK by Derrick Leon" (The
Observer, 26 March 1944): After a long review, Orwell writes, "...
this is an outstanding book, and though one cannot not advise
people to buy books costing twenty-five shillings, at least
everyone who can borrow a copy should read it." At the time the
average wage for general workers was about four-and-a-half pounds
(90 shillings) a week, and for skilled workers about six pounds
(120 shillings) a week. so for the average worker it would take
28% of his weekly wage, and for a skilled worker, 20%. Obviously
wages in the United States cover a broad range, but if we take
$70,000 a year as an average, this would be the equivalent of a
book costing over $300. Clearly, this work was not going to sell a
lot of copies to your average worked in Britain.
Another conversion table, however, claims the purchasing power of
twenty-five shillings in 1944 is equivalent to about 70 pounds, or
$95. This doesn't really make it more affordable in real terms.
Either way, it makes today's hardcover prices ($30, on the
average) seem like bargains, and trade paperbacks ($20, on the
average) practically giveaways. The reason those prices seem high
is that for a long time the incredibly cheap mass market
paperbacks spoiled the reader of popular books. (Whether a
biography of Tolstoy would have come out in mass market format is
another question.)
Now the mass market format is being phased out, and the electronic
and audio formats have entered the market. The electronic format
is the cheapest, but you are not actually buying a book, but the
right to read a book. You can't resell it, and if the supporting
hardware or platform becomes obsolete, or if the vendor decides
you shouldn't have it, you don't have the book anymore.
And coincidentally, there was a recent column on Book Riot (<
https://bookriot.com/were-in-a-book-affordability-crisis/>)
talking about the cost of books now that mass market is going away.
The earliest mass market the author of the column (R. Nassor) has
is a 1966 book from Bantam Books for $0.50 ($5.08, adjusted for
inflation). (They clearly started collecting late; I have mass
market paperbacks going back to the early 1950s at least,
depending on how one counts such early appearances as Donald
Wollheim's 1943 POCKETBOOK OF SCIENCE FICTION. Penguin Books
started publishing what were effectively the first mass market
paperback books in 1935; the term was first used by Pocket Books
in 1939.) The latest they have is a 2025 book from Avon for $9.99.
By comparison a 2025 trade paperback costs on between $15.99 and
$21.99.
Ebooks are basically rented to you, not owned, and Kindle
Unlimited at $11.99 a month has the same flaws. As Nassor notes,
if they want to read a book without owning it, they will go to the
public library. So they do not think that low ebook prices are
comparable. (Not noted is that Kindle Unlimited is not really
unlimited: Of the estimated 12 million Kindle books on Amazon,
less than half--5 million--are available in Kindle Unlimited. It
is unlimited in the sense that you can borrow as many of these as
you want, though no more than twenty at a time.)
In a later essay, "Are Books Too Dear?" (Manchester Evening News,
1 June 1944), Orwell goes into the cost of books in more detail.
He starts with two premises: The more the public reads, the
better, and it is undesirable that writers should starve to death.
He then figures out what the writer's annual income is when a book
sells for seven [shillings] and six pence (apparently the standard
price before the war; during the war it was half a guinea). The
author gets 50 pounds for every thousand sold, but a writer's
first book rarely sells more than six or seven hundred. The writer
is somewhat helped by the fact that at the time lending library
charges two pence to borrow a book and some of the local taxes
also supported the cost of books in the public libraries. In fact,
Orwell claims it is the libraries and not the book-buying public
that manages to support the writer.
In 1935, Penguin Books came out with reprints at sixpence which
were also better bound and more attractive than the other
publishers' books. But this was only financially sound for the
writers if it was for reprints, not for original publication, and
Orwell concludes that the price for books is not unreasonable,
especially given the existence of libraries. [-ecl]
===================================================================
Evelyn C. Leeper
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
Just so we're clear: Jeffrey Dahmer served longer in the
military, was accused of raping fewer people, was
responsible for fewer deaths, and paid more taxes than
Donald Trump.
--unknown
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2