From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

THE MT VOID
10/31/25 -- Vol. 44, No. 18, Whole Number 2404

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:
Middletown (NJ) Public Library Science Fiction Discussion
Group
Picks for Turner Classic Movies in November (comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
REDS (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
Peter Cushing (letter of comment by Paul Dormer)
THE STONE TAPE and New Podcast (letters of comment
by Peter Trei and Bernard Peek)
ANDOR and Other "Star Wars" Media (letters of comment
by Peter Trei and Steve Coltrin)
This Week's Reading ("The Golden Man")
(book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

===================================================================

TOPIC: Middletown (NJ) Public Library Science Fiction Discussion
Group

Nov 6 DARK STAR (1974) & novelization by Alan Dean Foster
<https://bookreadfree.com/all/191881>

===================================================================

TOPIC: Picks for Turner Classic Movies in November (comments by
Evelyn C. Leeper)

We have VAMPYR left over from October, a Tarzan movie every
Saturday morning, but we also have a half dozen great political
films (in honor of off-year elections?):

SEVEN DAYS IN MAY
THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE
ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN
A FACE IN THE CROWD
THE DAY OF THE JACKAL
A TALE OF TWO CITIES (1935)

The last two are not usually categorized as political, but the
motivation in THE DAY OF THE JACKAL is political, and A TALE OF
TWO CITIES is set in and driven by the French Revolution, and
deals with what happens when the group in power starts killing off
anyone they think is an enemy of the state. (I could even have
added RASPUTIN AND THE EMPRESS, or THE CANDIDATE, but didn't.)

[SEVEN DAYS IN MAY, Monday, November 3, 8:00PM]
[THE DAY OF THE JACKAL, Wednesday, November 5, 8:00PM]
[THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, Thursday, November 6, 12:45AM]
[A TALE OF TWO CITIES (1935), Thursday, November 6, 2:00PM]
[A FACE IN THE CROWD, Saturday, November 22, 4:45PM]
[ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN, Wednesday, November 26, 10:15PM]

Other films of interest:

SATURDAY, November 1
7:00 AM Vampyr (1932)
10:00 AM Tarzan and the Green Goddess (1938)
3:30 PM The Thing from Another World (1951)

MONDAY, November 3
12:00 AM The Mark of Zorro (1920)
8:00 PM Seven Days in May (1964)

TUESDAY, November 4
3:15 AM The Wind and the Lion (1975)
5:30 AM Logan's Run (1975)
10:15 AM Svengali (1931)
3:45 PM Phantom of the Rue Morgue (1954)
6:30 PM Fingers at the Window (1942)

WEDNESDAY, November 5
8:00 PM The Day of the Jackal (1973)

THURSDAY, November 6
12:45 AM The Manchurian Candidate (1962)
10:00 PM A Tale of Two Cities (1935)

FRIDAY, November 7
2:30 AM Kismet (1944)
4:15 AM The Story of Mankind (1957)
8:00 PM The Wizard of Oz (1939)
10:00 PM Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

SATURDAY, November 8
2:15 AM Jason and the Argonauts (1963)
10:00 AM Tarzan's Revenge (1938)
3:30 PM The Boy with Green Hair (1948)
5:15 PM The Wizard of Oz (1939)
7:15 PM The Power of Film Episode 1: Popular and
Memorable (2023)

SUNDAY, November 9
9:15 PM The Mummy (1932)

WEDNESDAY, November 12
8:00 PM North by Northwest (1959)

THURSDAY, November 13
2:45 AM Fail Safe (1964)
8:00 PM The Invention of Cinema: Cinema Finds its Voice (2022)

FRIDAY, November 14
1:15 AM Blackmail (1929)
2:45 AM Becoming Hitchcock - The Legacy of Blackmail (2024)
8:00 PM Brazil (1985)
10:30 PM 12 Monkeys (1995)

SATURDAY, November 15
1:00 AM Time Bandits (1981)
3:00 AM Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
4:30 AM Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979)
10:00 AM Tarzan Finds a Son! (1939)
7:15 PM The Power of Film Episode 2: Trapped (2023)
5:00 PM Touch of Evil (1958)

SUNDAY, November 16
5:45 PM The Birds (1963)
8:00 PM The Big Lebowski (1998)

MONDAY, November 17
12:00 AM Vertigo (1958)

TUESDAY, November 18
6:00 AM Cat People (1942)
7:30 AM Camelot (1967)

THURSDAY, November 20
6:30 AM The Return of Dr. X (1939)

SATURDAY, November 22
10:00 AM Tarzan's Secret Treasure (1941)
12:00 PM Gigi (1958)
4:45 PM A Face in the Crowd (1957)
7:15 PM The Power of Film Episode 3: Character
Relationships (2023)

SUNDAY, November 23
3:45 AM The Crimson Pirate (1952)

MONDAY, November 24
8:00 PM Dog Day Afternoon (1975)

TUESDAY, November 25
10:45 AM Rasputin and the Empress (1932)

WEDNESDAY, November 26
8:00 PM The China Syndrome (1979)
10:15 PM All the President's Men (1976)

THURSDAY, November 27
7:00 AM The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (1962)
11:15 AM The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T. (1953)
12:45 PM The Absent-Minded Professor (1961)
2:30 PM Doctor Dolittle (1967)
5:15 PM Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968)

SATURDAY, November 29
10:00 AM Tarzan's New York Adventure (1942)
7:15 PM The Power of Film Episode 4: Heroes and Villains (2023)

[-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: REDS (film review by Mark R. Leeper)

[This review is from 1981, and was not printed in the MT VOID (or
the "Holmdel Science Fiction Club Notice", as it was then known)
because at the time, only science fiction and fantasy films were
included. So in remembrance of Diane Keaton, we will print it now.
-ecl]

I think if I had known beforehand what this film was, I never
would have gone to see it. The concept of Warren Beatty writing,
directing, and starring in a film about American intellectuals
caught up in the Russian Revolution and the formation of American
Communist parties sounds about as reasonable and appealing as
would be a treatment of the Wars of the Roses by Steve Martin.
Until now I have never been much impressed by anything Beatty has
been connected with. Luckily I decided to see REDS on a whim
before I knew anything about it, and I came out saying that Beatty
deserves the Oscar for producing the Best Picture of the Year.

In truth, REDS comes as close to being a thinking person's
historical epic as any film has since LAWRENCE OF ARABIA.
The film is a biography of an historical figure no less
controversial than T. E. Lawrence, American Communist John Reed,
author of TEN DAYS THAT SHOOK THE WORLD. The story traces the
life of Reed (Warren Beatty) and his wife, Louise Bryant (Diane
Keaton), from Reed's journalistic origins in Portland, Oregon, to
New York's Greenwich Village, where a clutch of intellectuals are
building the foundations of what was to become two Communist
parties (the American Communist Party and the American Communist
Labor Party). Incidentally here also is formed a love triangle
among Reed, Bryant, and Eugene O'Neill (played very ably by Jack
Nicholson).

Then the film really starts moving. We are carried away with the
Reeds to France for World War I, to Russia to see the laying of
the foundations of the Bolshevik Revolution, back to the United
States where Reed is swept into the turmoil of the Communist
movement in America, and again to Russia to see the less than
happy results of the Revolution. All this and much more happens
to Reed in the short span of years from 1915 to 1920.

Such a film could easily have become a propaganda tract for any of
many different groups: the New York liberal community, the
American government, the American Communist Party, the Soviet
Communist Party, and several others. Instead, a rounded view of
each is presented; each of the major forces takes licks and kudos,
though usually more of the former. In the end none gets a clean
bill of health and the only positive stand the film seems to take
is for the idealism of youth. The idealism of the Reeds seems
noble even if it is a tragic flaw that alienates them from their
own country and leaves them easy prey to be exploited by the
Soviets.

The casting of the film is odd, to say the least. Beatty, Keaton,
and Nicholson are certainly not the sort of dramatic actors one
would expect to find in an historic epic film. In addition, the
film is laced with several other unexpected but familiar faces
even, in small parts. Along with Paul Sorvino, Maureen Stapleton,
and Jerzy Kosinski, small roles include Ian Wolfe, Bessie Love,
George Plimpton, Dolph Sweet, and Gene Hackman. In addition, the
film is interspersed with the testimony of what it calls
"witnesses," people who lived through the period (and most of whom
knew the Reeds). Included in the witnesses are such diverse
personalities as Will Durant, George Jessel, and Henry Miller.
Their appearance in the film, a set of inserts, adds an air of
documentary authenticity to the proceedings that Beatty uses to
good advantage.

Paramount Pictures has been very low-key over the last few years;
their output was mostly very minor films. Now, in the past
eighteen months, the mountain logo has graced boxoffice successes
like AIRPLANE and RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, and artistic successes
like ORDINARY PEOPLE, ELEPHANT MAN, DRAGONSLAYER, and now REDS. A
record like that would be impressive for any studio in the world.
After years of being one of the lesser "major studios," it looks
like Paramount is bidding for the Number One spot. [-mrl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: Peter Cushing (letter of comment by Paul Dormer)

In response to Evelyn's comments on Peter Cushing in the 10/24/25
issue of the MT VOID, Paul Dormer writes:

I was amused to see when the Laurel and Hardy comedy A CHUMP AT
OXFORD appeared on TV many years ago that one of the students is
played by Cushing, in what the IMDb gives as his second film role.
[-pd]

Evelyn responds:

I see the IMDb lists THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK (1939) as his first
film. That must be a recent discovery, since for years I had heard
that A CHUMP AT OXFORD was his first film.

And the first film that had both Cushing and Christopher Lee was
not THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN. They were "together" in three films
before that: HAMLET (1948), MOULIN ROUGE (1952), and ALEXANDER THE
GREAT (1956). I say "together", but they had no scenes together in
any of them (in ALEXANDER THE GREAT Lee only provided dubbing for
Helmut Dantine's character).

One reason, by the way, that one variously sees 22 and 24 as the
number of films they were in together is probably because some do
not count ALEXANDER THE GREAT or THE DEVIL'S AGENT (1962) where
Cushing's scenes were shot, but ended up on the cutting room
floor. [-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: THE STONE TAPE and New Podcast (letters of comment by Peter
Trei and Bernard Peek)

In response to Evelyn's comments on THE STONE TAPE in the 10/24/25
issue of the MT VOID, Peter Trei writes:

I saw this when it was first broadcast (I was living in England
then). I was fifteen, and found it genuinely scary. [-pt]

Bernard Peek adds:

I still find it really scary. [-bp]

In response to the announcement of a new podcast in the same
issue, Peter writes:

That's 'Bielak'. I've known him for years, and he's the guy who
got me started as a professional programmer, hiring a
biochemistry major without a CS degree.

I'll have to check that out. [-pt]

Evelyn responds:

Sorry, Richie; obviously I need to proofread better. [-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: ANDOR and Other "Star Wars" Media (letters of comment by
Peter Trei and Steve Coltrin)

In response to Evelyn's comments on her "to-watch" list in the
10/24/25 issue of the MT VOID, Peter Trei writes:

Let me add to your burden. Watch ANDOR (on Disney TV). Yes, it's
'Star Wars', but its the best written SW show ever made.

You can think of it as eight movies if it makes you feel better,
with 24 episodes set up as three episode arcs.

So much thought and care went into this (as well as a very high
budget), that it is equal, and perhaps better, than the original
trilogy.

If you're doubtful, check the reviews on YT. [-pt]

Evelyn replies:

I don't have Disney TV, and I have no plans to get Disney TV. I
also don't have Amazon Prime, or AppleTV, or Hulu, and no plans
to get those either. I do have Netflix and Turner Classic Movies,
and also the free Hoopla and Kanopy (not to mention an extensive
DVD and VHS collection, as well as the occasional DVD from the
library), and those are more than sufficient to keep me supplied.
[-ecl]

Steve Coltrin adds:

I wholeheartedly agree with every word of this, and strongly
suggest following ANDOR immediately with ROGUE ONE, which
continues the story almost seamlessly.

(There's an episode of REBELS that continues a different thread of
the last arc of ANDOR, but that's a whole different rabbit hole to
jump down. The first few episodes of REBELS seems aimed at
children, but it grows up the hard way alongside one of the
characters ... and it leads into AHSOKA the way ANDOR leads into
ROGUE ONE.

(And AHSOKA builds on CLONE WARS, which, believe it or not,
justifies the existence of Episodes II and III. (Nothing can
justify the existence of Episode I. It's worse than the Holiday
Special.)) [-sc]

===================================================================

TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

Looking through a list of Philip K. Dick movies, I decided that a
lot of them were worth re-watching. One of the lesser-known ones
was NEXT (2007), based on Dick's short story "The Golden Man". The
film's credits say it is based on the "novel story" "The Golden
Man". There is no such novel, just a twenty-eight-page short
story. I read it in Judith Merril's anthology BEYOND THE BARRIERS
OF TIME AND SPACE. In the introduction to the story, Merril says,
"The theme [precognition] is handled here, with unusual dramatic
impact, by a young West Coast writer of exceptional promise."
Well, the anthology *is* from 1954.

But little of the story is left. Nicholas Cage has precognition,
but none of the back story is there, and Cage bears no
resemblance, either in appearance or in personality, to the
character in the story. Which is a pity, because the back story
seems particularly relevant to today's world. The plot is also
totally different. In fact, all that is left is the idea of
precognition (which Dick is better known for in "The Minority
Report", the film of which also made major changes to the original
story).

This is not unusual in films--taking a story and removing almost
everything from it when it is made into a film, or rather, a film
is made "inspired by" the story. This is why, by the way, that
whenever I am asked which of my favorite novels I would like to
see made into a movie, my answer is, "Please, God, none of them."
Not to mention that a novel is too long to make into a movie
without removing a lot. A better length is a novella, or even
shorter. As an example, I recently watched LAST AND FIRST MEN. It
would have fit right into the "Wavelengths" track at the Toronto
International Film Festival, a track devoted to the experimental
and avant garde, which Mark and I tended to avoid. A narrator
(Tilda Swinton), but no actors, and a lot of slow panning over
structures, landscapes, monuments, and who knows what, all in
black and white. And it covers only the Eighteenth Men in any
case. Lord knows what Olaf Stapledon would have made of it. [-ecl]

===================================================================

Evelyn C. Leeper
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com


Diets come and diets go but the girth abides.
--Mark R. Leeper


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2