Tag Archives: sf

We love trashy TV

I’m watching a bit at the moment, in between Stargate episodes, as J is mucking around somewhere.  League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is on one channel – I’ve written about it before; I do love its glorious trashiness (although I am still really not convinced by Nemo as some sort of nautical Raj, I do still love the “Call me Ishmael” line) - the Logies is on another, with some terrible dresses; and Law and Order is on yet the other commercial channels.  Love Sunday nights.

Pushing Ice

The latest Alastair Reynolds – it’s been out for only 6 months or so, since it refers to an article in Scientific American in mid-2005 (about suspended animation being a closer reality than scifi readers might think). Once again, fantastic.

Much closer to home, this time, in that it starts in the 2050s and goes from there. It spans a huge amount of time, and it is most definitely science fiction, but still – at least the Earth is real and known, in this story, unlike the Revelation Space quartet. The characters are not as alien, the tech not as incomprehensible. It is true space opera: the gamut of human experiences, emotions, treacheries and heroism. All done in a style that still leaves me amazed at the sheer finesse of his writing, the exquisite way he manages to introduces new ideas and issues and not make it feel like a lurch in the plot. The man is a master. I am simply hanging out for the next book, and I have no idea when it might get coming out… or – terrifying thought – if there even will be one. Horrible thought!!

Century Rain

Another Alastair Reynolds book, completely (well, mostly, I think… hmmm… now that I think about it…) unrelated to the Absolution Gap et al universe. Once again, parallel stories happening, but only two, and they joined up much more quickly than in his other novels. It was also less techy that the others, probably because it isn’t set so far into the future – only (!) the 23rd century (again, mostly…). The characters were exceptionally well-drawn, as expected; I have to say that Reynolds doesn’t exactly give his characters an easy time of it, as a general rule. I really like the way Reynolds writes: he seems essentially to assume that he is describing a real place and time, and he’s just reminding the reader of stuff they already ought to know. Clever. His descriptions are unintrusive, which is highly commendable – like I said, it’s not like he’s trying to ram this new world down your throat.

Exceptionally highly recommended.

Mentoring Yr9s in literature

I volunteered/agreed to help out with the enhancement programme at school for Yr9 students; they get to choose a book, and then have to do a presentation on the themes/messages to the other students in the programme. Each kid gets paried with a mentor to help them think through the issues. I took on four, because I had already read two of the books; this has gone down to three, because the girl who chose Wuthering Heights has gone on holiadys early… for which I am grateful, since it’s a while since I read it and I don’t really feel like reading it again (hate every single character, although I quite like the book itself).

I read Saint of Dragons, by Jason Hightman, yesterday. It was in the 4-9 year old section at Borders, which I don’t really get – it’s a good 300-odd pages, and in some parts a bit dark; it certainly wouldn’t be read by even a standard 9 year old by themselves, I would have thought. Anyway. It wasn’t too bad; interesting ideas – about a boy who turns out to be the descendant of St George, who has to join his father in hunting dragons down. I was a bit disappointed, though, because the ideas weren’t completely carried through with, and some of the writing was pretty simplistic. I think I’ll try and get the boy to think about the issue of heroism – who is a hero? What makes someone not a hero? – because that is pretty big throughout the book… and could have been more so, had Hightman explored it more.

Before that one, I read The Sea, by John Banville. Winner of the Booker Prize this year, making it only the second winner I have ever read (the first was Life of Pi, which I did enjoy). It is not the sort of book I would have chosen to read, and it will be interesting to see what my mentoree thought of it. I quite liked it, in an odd sort of way… the style sometimes got a bit annoying, always going back and forth in time – the present stuff written in the present tense, which is pretty unusual, but generally intriguing. It’s about a man whose wife has recently died revisiting the site of childhood holidays, reliving the traumas and joys, in an effort to get away from his grief. I did like it, I think.

The other book is The Chrysalids, by John Wyndham, which is the other book that I had previously read. I love Wyndham; I think he embodies speculative fiction, as opposed to science fiction, exceptionally well. His ideas are so cool, and he writes in such an unembellished way; I think this is very much a product of the pre-blockbuster time, pre-Star Wars basically. He wasn’t writing for film. HG Wells, Ursula Le Guin, Andre Norton – I think they’re in the same category. I really like all of them, their sparse detail; I have described Wells and Le Guin in particular as drawing pencil sketches, as opposed to the full-on oils of, say, Simon Green or Julian May or, dare I say it, Robert Jordan. It’s interesting: I read Le Guin and some Norton early on in my scifi reading – Wyndham too, actually – so I enjoy it. One friend in particular, who has really only read more recent scifi/fantasy, really couldn’t get into Le Guin. Anyway – The Chrysalids – excellent book. Deviations… the cleverest part, I think, is how he lists the things people see as deviations, and includes things that we, the readers, know are not deviations. Sigh. I must re-read Day of the Triffids.

Films I saw in the holidays…

… which was a while ago now, but what the heck.

Batman Begins
Fantastic. So well filmed; Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman were great in support, and I barely noticed Katie Holmes (‘ray). And Batman himself – well, he was brilliant. Played the dark and brooding very convincingly. I am definitely looking forward to the sequel, because this Batmas – with all new and improved gadgets – is very entertaining to watch.

War of the Worlds
Yeh. Not convinced. Thinking back on the book, I’m wondering whether it is actually the book’s fault. HG Wells did not exactly write a book that could be easily turned into a movie; I haven’t read it in years, but I think he was writing with less of an idea to character development than to exploring the concept of alien invasion and its consequences for the world. As a result, any movie (and what I’ve seen of the 50s version, while being an intersting commentary on nuclear USA, was crap) has to have some people-stuff inserted by someone else, and I just don’t think it works – not and still calling it War of the Worlds. I think Tom Cruise was actually quite weak in it, but then the character itself didn’t allow for much. There were some cool effects.

Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
Did I see it on holidays? Don’t recall; anyway. I liked it, in defiance of all the purists I think. The fact that it was started before Adams died made me feel a bit better about it. Yes, there were bits that were totally not in the book, but anyone who thinks those books could be successfull translated to the screen and be understood by total Adams-novices, which is a large part of the world, needs their heads read. I liked most of the insertions, actually, and I thought John Malkovitch was quite funny. Truly, though, Arthur was very enteraining, but for me the entire film was owned by Zaphod. He was perfect.

There was another movie we saw in Darwin, too, but I forget what it was…

Sin City

Hmmm.

J has wanted to see this film for a long time, and I thought it looked interesting too – quite like film noir usually, and such a fantastic cast (Bruce Willis, Clive Owen, Mickey Rourke, Rosaria Dawson…)! I must say that I hadn’t heard very much about it before we saw it, except that it was black and white with bits of colour. I wish now that I had been a bit more prepared – well, the dude at the theatre warned me a bit, saying it was gruesome, but still. It was very good: fascinating and intertwined stories, very well done as an adaption of a graphic novel because that’s just what it looked like, and the colour was superbly done. However. Gruesome and not a little grotesque; I had not realised that it is rated MA+. I would definitely have to think before I recommended it to anyone.

The Island

Someone I know described this as The Rock (Sean Connery, Nicholas Cage) meets Minority Report, with a little bit of Matrix thrown in. Pretty much. I liked the story, and I thought it was developed well; the characters were mostly quite realistic, and the acting was great – Steve Buscemi is, as ever, very good, although I wouldn’t have recognised Sean Bean until the end if I hadn’t seen his name in the credits, since mostly he looks (unusually) very slick.

Overall, worthwhile. Some superfluous explosions and chases, and some scenes that just made me impatient because of their patent absurdity, but those were fairly minor. The ending… well, you can probably imagine. It is Hollywood, after all.

Deathstalker saga has stalked itself out

I am finally completely finished with the Deathstalker series… except for Deathstalker Prelude, but that doesn’t count, since it’s not about a Deathstalker, it’s just set in the same universe. I am very glad I have read them all – very worthwhile in the end, and I must say not quite as dark as I had been expecting. It’s certainly not Eddings, but there is definitely more horrid scifi in the world than Green. I really liked the Owen character, and thought he developed quite well, although once again the repetition of words and phrases did get a little tiring. I guess that’s the danger of a series that’s about 7 books long. I forgive him.

Deathstalker/Long weekend

Ok, so… in Lorne for the loong weekend, and I didn’t leave the house in about 48 hours. That’s not to say I didn’t go outside – I did, they have a perfectly lovely balcony. We dragged cushions out there and slept for a bit in the sun on Saturday afternoon; it was great.

Anyway, I started my third book of the weekend this morning. The first two were the Deathstalkers I mentioned. Really good. The book – even two books – before, I was getting a little bit distressed that maybe, just maybe, he was losing The Touch a bit; he was repeating stuff in the same book, whole phrases in fact (which is fine if it’s a character’s catch phrase, but when it’s the narrator describing something, I’m not such a fan), and I was getting a bit narked. But never fear – these were really well written, so it’s all good. Except… yes… I realised when I got home that I have not, as previously thought, bought all of the next books. I have Deathstalker Prelude, which I am looking forward to reading, but I don’t have the one after Deathstalker Legacy, which is making me a bit mad. But the Readers’ Feast night is coming up, so I’m not that fussed… they will soon be in my grubby little hands.

Hitchhikers’ Guide

I liked it. I don’t really mind that much that they changed the story a bit – even putting in new bits – because the story is so completely flipped out that it would be impossible to film in the first place, and then no one would go and see even if it was filmed except for the really hard-core Adams fans, and most of them would be likely to be disappointed anyway. So, my thought is, at least this way they would have got a pretty good audience of both Adams-nuts and others, which might in turn get more people reading the books, which is all good.

I liked Jon Malkovitch is Harma Kavula. He was cool. And the guy who played Zaphod – so, so perfect.