From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom
THE MT VOID
07/18/25 -- Vol. 44, No. 3, Whole Number 2389
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 17 (NIGHT OF THE EAGLE, DEVIL DOLL)
(film reviews by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Southern Sky Telescope (comment by Gregory Frederick)
Starbucks (letter of comment by Pete Rubinstein)
THE MAN IN THE WHITE SUIT (letters of comment
by Gary McGath and Jay Morris)
Forgotten Films (letters of comment by Gary McGath,
Lowell Gilbert, and Scott Dorsey)
This Week's Reading (Sherlock Holmes)
(book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Mini Reviews, Part 17 (film comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Two more neglected films, which I will comment on jointly.
In 1932 A. E. Merritt wrote a novel titled BURN WITCH BURN.
In 1936 it was made into a movie, THE DEVIL-DOLL.
In 1943 Fritz Leiber wrote a novel called CONJURE WIFE about women
using witchcraft.
In 1944 it was made into a movie, WEIRD WOMAN.
In 1963 it was remade as NIGHT OF THE EAGLE (UK title), also known
as BURN, WITCH, BURN (US title), also known (later) as CONJURE
WIFE. A two-minute introduction/warning was added to the American
version. This film has nothing to do with the novel BURN WITCH
BURN.
In 1964, Lindsay Shonteff made a movie titled DEVIL DOLL. It has
nothing to do with the film THE DEVIL-DOLL.
In 1980 BURN, WITH, BURN was remade again as WITCHES' BREW (also
known as WHICH WITCH IS WHICH?).
So to recap, there is a book titled BURN WITCH BURN and a film
titled BURN, WITCH, BURN, They have nothing to do with each other.
There is a movie titled THE DEVIL-DOLL and a movie titled DEVIL
DOLL. They have nothing to do with each other.
There is a book titled CONJURE WIFE which has been made into three
different movies with five different titles.
This may explain why NIGHT OF THE EAGLE / BURN, WITCH, BURN /
CONJURE WIFE, and DEVIL DOLL are on Mark's list of neglected gems:
people can't figure out how to find them.
NIGHT OF THE EAGLE (1963) is based on the premise that
women--pretty much all women in the film--use witchcraft to
protect their families and promote their husbands' careers. (It's
a bit inconsistent in this. Tansy seems to come to witchcraft
only after a trip to the Caribbean, where she saw an example of
how it worked. Yet the other practitioners in the film haven't
traveled to somewhere where witchcraft is more common, so how did
they come by it?)
The classroom scene reminded me of the classroom scene in RAIDERS
OF THE LOST ARK, where one student has written a message to Jones
on her eyelids. I wonder if Spielberg was inspired by this film.
Released theatrically 25 April 1962.
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056279/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/burn_witch_burn>
WEIRD WOMAN is not on Mark's list, probably because it is not very
good. It was part of the "Inner Sanctum" series, and most
definitely a "B" picture. The "islands" here where the
voodoo-like ceremonies and superstitions come from are not in the
Caribbean, but in the South Seas, and the writer (or director)
padded out the film with a long South Seas dance sequence. At
least Paula's belief in witchcraft is based on being raised in
that culture after her anthropologist father died, rather than
being converted in a single night.
Released theatrically 1 March 1944.
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0037453/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/weird-woman>
DEVIL DOLL (1964) is your basic "evil ventriloquist's doll" story.
There is something about it that makes it a classic. Most people
think of the segment of DEAD OF NIGHT (1948) as the first
instance, but twenty years before that was THE GREAT GABBO (1929),
starring Erich Von Stroheim. I would say there couldn't be
anything much earlier, because one couldn't have a silent film
about a ventriloquist, but Edgar Bergen and Charlie McCarthy were
a big hit on the radio, so who knows? Of course, in a movie there
is no skill involved either, just recording a second track and
overlaying it. Of course, in THE GREAT GABBO the doll is not
possessed in any form, just as aspect of Gabbo's psychological
state.
SPOILER: It is interesting that in both these "film groups", the
earlier film has no supernatural elements (even though it may
appear to at first), while the later one does have the
supernatural. Certainly there had bene supernatural films in the
silent era, so I am not sure what this indicates.
(THE GREAT GABBO is also a great example of a pre-Code film, with
a lot more flesh shown among the showgirls--did I mention it was a musical?--than would be possible under the Production Code.)
Other well-known movies and television shows featuring a
supernatural ventriloquist's doll include two "Twilight Zone"
episodes ("The Dummy" and "Caesar and Me"), and the film MAGIC
(1978).
Released theatrically September 1964.
Film Credits:
<
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058007/reference>
What others are saying:
<
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1005762-devil_doll>
[-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Southern Sky Telescope (comment by Gregory Frederick)
"A new telescope that will be making movies of the Southern Sky
for ten years just started its observations last month. It will
discover stellar explosions, new comets, unseen asteroids,
interstellar visitors, and many previously unknown celestial
objects.
"Rubin Observatory is the first of its kind: its mirror design,
camera sensitivity, telescope speed, and computing infrastructure
are each in an entirely new category. The 8.4-meter Simonyi Survey
Telescope at Rubin Observatory, equipped with the LSST Camera--the
largest digital camera ever built--will take detailed images of
the southern hemisphere sky for ten years, covering the entire sky
every few nights and creating an ultra-wide,
ultra-high-definition, time-lapse record --the largest
astronomical movie of all time. This unique movie will bring the
night sky to life, yielding a treasure trove of discoveries:
asteroids and comets, pulsating stars, and supernova explosions."
Details in:
<
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLawdQuTIGY>
P.S. That interstellar object just discovered is thought to from
the center of our galaxy is could be older then our Solar System.
[-gf]
Evelyn adds:
The Vera C. Rubin Observatory is named after the astronomer Vera
Rubin, who provided the first convincing evidence for the
existence of dark matter. [-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Starbucks (letter of comment by Pete Rubinstein)
In response to John Hertz's comments on Starbucks in the 07/11/25
issue of the MT VOID, Pete Rubinstein writes:
I am somewhat surprised you didnrCOt get more "Battlestar Galactica" references. [-pr]
===================================================================
TOPIC: THE MAN IN THE WHITE SUIT (letters of comment by Gary
McGath and Jay Morris)
In response to Evelyn's comments on THE MAN IN THE WHITE SUIT in
the 07/11/25 issue of the MT VOID, Gary McGath writes:
I love the ending (which I won't spoil here). [-gmg]
Jay Morris adds:
And who turns out to be the key figure. [-jm]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Forgotten Films (letters of comment by Gary McGath, Lowell
Gilbert, and Scott Dorsey)
In response to Evelyn's comments on Mark's calling VILLAGE OF THE
DAMNED a "forgotten film" in the 07/11/25 issue of the MT VOID,
Gary McGath writes:
There are some genuinely forgotten science fiction films, but I
can't remember what they are. [-gmg]
Lowell Gilbert writes:
Well, yes, of course. They say that memory is always the second
thing to go. [-lg]
Scott Dorsey suggests:
They would likely be films like K-PAX which everyone forgets is
really a science fiction film. [-sd]
Evelyn adds:
The classic example I give of a science fiction film that people
don't think of as science fiction is COCOON. A relative who often
said she did not like science fiction movies once mentioned having
seen COCOON and liking it. So I said, "See, there is a science
fiction movie you like." "COCOON isn't science fiction," she
emphatically stated. "Let's see ... aliens come from outer space
and give us immortality, and you say that is not science fiction?"
Well, okay, she had to concede that it was.
For books, the example is FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON. (So I suppose
CHARLY would count as a movie of that sort.) There are of course
others. [-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Three Laws of Robotics (letter of comment by Steve Coltrin)
In response to Evelyn's comments on the Three Laws of Robotics in
the 07/11/25 issue of the MT VOID, Steve Coltrin writes:
A robot must not fail to maximize shareholder value, or by inaction
allow shareholder value not to be maximized. [-sc]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
A recurring idea in several Sherlock Holmes stories is that
someone says something enigmatic. Holmes tries to figure it out,
but eventually gives up. Then after he solves the mystery, he
figures out what the words meant and how he should have figured it
out from them.
SPOILERS AHEAD
For example, no one who is bitten by a snake is going to cry out,
"The speckled band!" They'd scream, "Snake!'
And someone dying trying to say "Black Jack of Ballarat" is far
more likely to have the energy and breath to say the first part
audibly and trail off at the end, than to mumble the first part
and say "a rat" clearly. (The BBC radio drama has him say "a rat"
twice in a row, which makes even less sense.)
And someone accusing her husband of sending his rival to die in
battle is unlikely to decide that the single word "David!" is a
clear enough and strong enough accusation.
Another recurring idea is that Holmes and Watson promise
discretion, or agree to suppress the truth to protect the
innocent, but then Watson writes up the story anyway. If the idea
is to conceal the King of Bohemia's relationship with Irene Adler,
how is publishing a story in the Strand Magazine going to do that?
Or how does publishing "The Boscombe Valley Mystery" keep Alice
from finding out the truth about her father, when it's all spelled
out? The argument that maybe names were changed doesn't work in
the latter case; Alice knows she employed Holmes, so she'll see
through any "anonymization".
And yet another trope I noticed in a few stories is that Holmes
often catches the criminal, but then lets them go. One person
claims that this happens in fourteen stories, but without
re-reading all the stories, I came up with only "The Priory
School", "The Blue Carbuncle", "The Three Gables", "The Boscombe
Valley Mystery", "The Abbey Grange", "The Mazarin Stone", and "The
Devil's Foot". [-ecl]
===================================================================
Evelyn C. Leeper
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
Get thee glass eyes;
And like a scurvy politician, seem
To see the things thou dost not.
--William Shakespeare
[King Lear, IV:6]
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2