Now that this sad shit-show of a saga is over, the only thing we have left, is the thought, ‘what if they did a decent sequel trilogy with a coherent story without the political rape that Disney inflicted upon this series?’. How hard was it to produce something that remotely resembles a Star Wars story?
Apart from the visuals, there are three fundamental flaws with Episodes 7, 8 and 9. The visual effects and art design are the trilogy’s best asset, but sometimes they do act against the films. The entire narrative seems to be built around these great visuals. And then, to make things unbearable, the cluttering of the SFX is overdone, almost to the point of ridiculousness.
If there’s one thing John Brunner is known for, it would be the culture shock he gives readers via his books. “Stand on Zanzibar” is one of those, with a staccato style of writing, Brunner throws everything at you; multiple points of view, news bulletins, media blitzes and a cacophony of characters, locations, immersing you in an anarchic, overcrowded corporate megalopolis.
It inevitably has to, because art starts off by imitating reality in an attempt to explain it in ways we humans can understand. We tell each other stories, to teach ourselves how to coexist in this strange existence, this universe. We learn from these tales all about what it means to be complex social beings.
The Halloween remake, or second remake, is, by all means, a very good return to the franchise. It does its job of capturing the feel, atmosphere and style of John Carpenter’s original. It doesn’t miss a beat, the dread and the scares are genuine, and the Shape is as menacing as ever. One decision the producers went for in this reboot, however, is the elimination of the events of Halloween 2, and pretty much everything that came later.
Michael Myers ceased being this paranormal, un-killable ‘Shape’.
Why?
A fascinating aspect of horror, in particular the slasher genre that the Halloween series ventured into, is which of the following possess the most frightening kind of horror; psychological evil or supernatural evil?
I bought a novel,Robopocalypse (2011) by Daniel H. Wilson, at an airport bookstore for a fast, time-killing read and while I wasn’t totally disappointed with it, it left me once again tackling the question about this ‘robocalypse’ that everyone is fearful about.
When Flash Gordon was ‘again’ resurrected back (thanks, Princess Aura for the first time) into pop culture by Seth MacFarlane in his film, Ted (2013), I was filled with bemusement and joy. Ever since that day, walking home from school and coming across the giant movie billboard, Mike Hodges’s Flash Gordon has remained doggedly on my top ten list of favourite movies.
Why?
For three decades I felt alone being a fan of this movie. Mention it at film school and people would look at me as if something was fundamentally wrong with my brain. I remember critics panning it at the time, much to my dismay. They were worried about cardboard characters and cardboard sets. Again, to my utter dismay.
The early eighties were remarkable, to me anyhow. Not only did my fascination with science fiction grind into high gear, but there was an explosion of new and modern genre films that hit the scene at around that time, in particular, Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner many having been influenced by film-makers from a bygone era, and more importantly, by novels penned by hardcore science fiction authors, such as Philip K Dick, just a decade earlier.
There’s nothing more bewilderingly mind-numbing than watching a science-fiction movie franchise get butchered and killed then brought to life again, re-butchered and murdered once again. It’s sad in a way because I really love this time-bending, robot monster, chase story. The potential, even without branching away from the hunter and the hunted plot device, is endless. Bewildered? With all this goodwill and talent, and money involved, how the hell could they get it so wrong? This is a major iconic brand. “The Terminator” is embedded in the brains of at least two or three generations of consumers. There is no shortage of creative talent nor money that prevent this story from working its magic, yet the IP owners have achieved nothing else but toss stools of shit at audiences across the globe. Sure, the movie industry wins, artists, technicians and executives got jobs, and the marketing machine scored, but tossing shit at the audience’s faces was still the end result.
Now the next time Skynet returns to threaten our future chances are audiences will be a little suspect before handing over money, or even waste time and bandwidth to illegally download it. Skynet will hopefully learn from past mistakes and deliver the killer blow they’ve been trying to throw since it first hatched up the plan to go back in time and kill John Conner.
As we enter a new chapter in the James Bond movie franchise, staunch fans like myself are apprehensive or intensely curious about what direction the franchise will take, and about who will be chosen to play the next 007. The naming of the actor to play the MI6 spy appears to have turned into a cultural festival that runs every decade or so, much like the naming of who will host the next Olympic Games. It’s a media tradition ever since George Lazenby famously turned his back on the franchise.
This is a tradition that revolves around a list of candidates, sourced mostly from public opinion and a little from industry insiders, and necessitates rounds and rounds of gossip and speculation.
MI6 Recruits
As of the time of writing, this is the list in order of whom I think will get the role.
Tom Hiddleston – With ex-head of MI6, Dame Judi Dench advocating him and reports that Barbara Broccoli is giving it serious thought, and the fact he’s coveting the role overtly, positioning himself with the right roles such as The Night Manager and the Jaguar commercials, I suspect he may snatch the role.
Aidan Turner – Well, he was involved in “talks” to play 007 last year, and is the right age and at the right point in his career, much like his rival Hiddlestone, and similar to Craig when he got the nod in 2006.
Tom Hardy – Occupies this spot because he can, without a doubt, pull off the Bond character without a hitch. But he may not want to do it, (and end up regretting it like Burt Reynolds) or his price tag may be a bit too high.
Damian Lewis – Looks like he was used by producers to intimidate Craig, just like they did with James Brolin when Roger Moore had second thoughts about playing Bond. He’d do the role easily, but I think time is against him if Eon Productions want to do another four to five films. And the fact that his ‘ginger’ hair doesn’t qualify him is ridiculous. He could do it but do only one, Lazenby style. Or do two, Dalton style. Gone are the days of a James Bond in his late 50s snuggling up with a twenty-something beauty.
Idris Elba – The general public has placed him as a contender. Again he’s in the same position as Lewis. He definitely can pull it off just as well as Lewis. But unless Sony and co. decide to do a one-off Bond film as a breaker between the Purvis-Wade-Haggis-Logan story arc and the next 007 story arc then I think this is not going to happen for him.
Resume for 00’s
What does an actor have to do to build a resume to be a serious 007 contender? Easy. Do a spy thriller (or something very similar) that has a bondesque element to it.
Roger Moore did The Saint (1962-1969) and The Persuaders (1971).
Timothy Dalton did Permission to Kill (1975)
Pierce Brosnan did Remington Steele (1982-87) and The Fourth Protocol (1987)
Daniel Craig did Road to Perdition (2002), Layer Cake (2004) and Munich (2005). Okay, he played gangsters in most, but he wore a suit.
George Lazenby was the only one who actually did nothing at all. He simply walked off the street and pronounced to Cubby that he was his next Bond. And Lazenby to this day is the closest actor to emulate Ian Fleming’s character.
On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
See, anyone can be James Bond. The notion that actors who are “gingers” or have “non-English English” backgrounds can’t play James Bond is absurd.
Anything and everything can happen in Bond movies.
Ian Fleming added Scottish ancestry to James Bond’s family history after seeing Connery in action on the big screen. Lazenby broke the fourth wall during the pre-title sequence, “that never happened to the other guy.”
Moore went into space and fought bad guys with lasers. Not to mention the blaxploitation, the Kung-fu exploitation and… did I mention the blatant Star Wars exploitation?
Bond faced off with Bond in 1983 as Kevin McClory took on the Broccoli clan. What a strange moment that was. That’s the thing with Bond fans, their loyalties are to Ian Fleming’s material, not some film studio.
Dalton escapes this one clean, well, that winking fish statue was ridiculous.
Then we have Brosnan, who after a solid stint as 007, ended up playing with invisible cars and space lasers and ice castle… these guys… How do you start the damn thing so good and ended up making it so bad?
Evolve Bond, Now.
Anyway, the thing with James Bond is that he evolves. He has gone from strangling women with bikini tops and slapping them around, to metrosexual to sensitive new-age brute. This is how MI6 Agent 007 has stayed alive all these decades. The producers have painstakingly stuck to a formula that works and balanced it with modern relevance. Yes, it has many times devolved into ridiculousness, but they have learned this lesson. For Your Eyes Only (1981) is a perfect example of when they learn, so too is Goldeneye (1995). Unfortunately, they forgot these lessons in Die Another Day (2002), with invisible cars, space lasers and …ice castles.
But the team at Eon may have backed itself into a corner with Purvis-Wade-Haggis-Logan story arc. Before Casino Royale (2006), there existed no interconnected storylines between the movies. Dr. No/Goldfinger was basically a template for all the other films that followed. No narrative was carried from the previous film. It took six films for Bond to acknowledge the death of his wife, and even then, in the same film (FYEO), they killed off Ernst Stavro Blofeld, just one of the few carryovers in the franchise, just to spite McClory who had won the rights to Blofeld, SPECTRE, and Thunderball at the time.
Reboots are Forever
By ‘rebooting’ 007 and having each film as direct sequels; with Bond earning his 00 status, exploring his Skyfall heritage and facing off with his long lost ‘stepbrother’, who turned out to be, yep Ernst Stavro Blofeld; for them to attempt another reboot to accommodate the actor or director, at this stage would be tiresome for even the staunchest of James Bond aficionados. The Spiderman franchise is a classic example, how many times do we have to see the damn spider bite Peter Parker? But wait, now that Sony has relented and joined the Marvel Universe, how can they ever disengage themselves from it? This current 007 story arc and style of character still has a cycle to go before a major makeover would be required. The Bond that exists now can be only softened a little or hardened a little, modified to a certain degree, otherwise Ian Fleming’s Bond ceases being Ian Fleming’s Bond.
It’s a hard balance, keeping the James Bond tradition and canon intact as well as keeping him invigorated and relevant. How do you change or maintain the franchise without abandoning a formula, backstory, and continuity built up since 1953?
I think Eon might be missing an opportunity with this behemoth IP, the oldest continuous media franchise of its kind ever. As other IP owners grapple with their own never-ending story universes, Paracosms are what they are calling them, Eon is faced with either pressing the repeat button, or they could venture out into a brave new world.
The motion picture arts are always evolving.
It started with adaptations. As the new medium was born there was a mountain of books available for filmmakers to base their stories. The Birth of a Nation (1915) was an adaption from the novel The Clansman, by Thomas Dixon, Jr.
Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ by Lew Wallace was first adapted in 1907 as a short B/W silent film. No one sort permission to use the book’s IP at the time, which was standard until somebody sued for copyright infringement and gave birth to the beginning of what would a hundred years later become conglomerate media franchises, i.e. paracosms.
Remakes became a good way to retell an old story and milk a known story to death. The 1925 version of Ben Hur, also a black and white silent film, was remade again in 1959, in Technicolor… with Charlton Heston. In 2003 it was remade as an animation and again starring Charlton Heston. Now in 2016, we have another remake coming and this time it’s in 3D. They call them “reimaginings”, “reinterpretations”, “re-adaptations”, or “new interpretations” depending on how shit they are. If it’s good, then it’s just a remake.
Sequels have their beginnings in early novels and novellas as authors sort to protect and expand their income streams. The first-ever film sequel is considered to be The Fall of a Nation (1916), a sequel to The Birth of a Nation released the year before. It’s all about market forces, if people want more, they get more. When they get served rubbish, they stay away.
Prequels first appeared in novels and were used to explore the backstory of a story. In cinema, it was Star Wars that popularize this type of sequel.
Reboots are all technically prequels. They came about as the early paracosms began to evolve. It was the exhaustion of the sequel format that brought this on. When a sequel can’t be maintained past number three, producers hit a brick wall. Reboots; when done right you end up with Casino Royale. Done wrong you end up with the Hulk, and a second Hulk until producers saw the light and went down the road of the Marvel Paracosm.
All this is an evolutionary process towards media paracosms.
Broccoli proved a character can basically live forever, Lucas proved paracosms exist, and Marvel is doing it. Now every content producer is diving in.
Now back to Bond.
What would a Fleming Paracosm look like? Who are the other superspies ready to serve Queen and country? Well, there are all the other Double O’s in waiting, each one unique in personality, skill set and backstory. When 007 sat in at a briefing during Thunderball, with all the other 00 agents, there was Eon’s Paracosm.
The need to pump out the same old movie is eliminated. MGM/Sony can do what Disney is doing with Star Wars, pump out spin-off movies between the main story arc. Instead of trying to please all audiences at once, they can explore, take risks, target different markets, and expand the fan base, without endangering the main canon established by Ian Fleming.
You can set one back in the ’60s, The Man from U.N.C.L.E (2015) style, and revisit the Connery era. Guy Ritchie’s U.N.C.L.E really worked in my opinion, and when you consider Fleming created Napoleon Solo, there is no reason why MGM/Sony can’t do something similar.
A more violent, sexier, R-rated 00 agent? The market is there. Look at how competitors like Deadpool (2016) and Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014) have stirred up this market.
And MI6 has plenty of 00 agents ready to get this job done.
001 – Edward Donne
002 – Bill Fairbanks
004
003 – Jason Walters / Jack Mason
004 – Aidan Flemmings
005 – Stuart Thomas
006 – Alec Trevelyan
007 – James Bond
008 – Bill Timothy
009 – Peter Smith
002
009
0010 – John Wolfgramm
0011 – Cederic
0012 – Sam Johnston
0013 – Briony Thorne
James Bond can do a cameo, come to an agent’s aid or compete with them. Imagine the charm factor when two egos clash, especially when one steals an asset meant for the other as what 007 did to 009 in SPECTRE (2015), a scene that really worked. A new agent can be introduced during the main canon film, and if taken in by audiences, a spin-off movie could follow. How about a 00 agent that continuously breaks the fourth wall? The possibilities in a Fleming Paracosm are endless.
CONCEPT ART FOR THE NOW-ABANDONED RIDLEY SCOTT FOREVER WAR FILM.
Whenever Joe Haldeman author puts out something, I read it. So, when each of these following novels came my way, I didn’t hesitate. His books feature plausible and ingenious technological and scientific ideas, so you can’t go wrong entering his worlds.
The Forever War
No one keen on hard science fiction should skip this novel. There is a reason it has garnered all those awards and accolades since it was published.
The reason: It tells a ripping story.
William Mandella is a school teacher who’s drafted to fight in an interstellar war against the alien Taurans. He survives battle after battle, but due to time dilation and space travel, hundreds of years go by between each mission. During this time, he experiences humanity morph into something he and his fellow veterans don’t recognise. All he hopes for is to survive the war and be reunited with his wife. But each battle is an evolution of warfare, becoming more deadlier than before.
This novel has it all. You care for Mandella. The battles are as gripping whether they take place on some outpost planet or in deep space. The finale is as satisfactory as one would want it, considering our journey through space and time.
This will turn you into a fan.
Camouflage
The premise revolves around two alien beings, both shape-shifters but of a different variety, who have been on Earth for aeons and whose futures are interlocked. The protagonist alien’s character develops with each page turn. The pace in which the story unfolds is gripping, so too is the action, and there is mounting excitement and tension as the decades pass and the two diametrically opposed mimic’s paths intersect. (Highlander) tropes abound as both have embedded themselves into human history, making do with their special shape-shifting abilities.
All this was very cool.
Now, if it weren’t for the central human character and his middle-age crisis story arc, and the ‘tired and contrived’ (Close Encounters of the Third Kind) ending, this could have been an outstanding work of SF. The evil alien antagonist wasn’t helping either. Where there was scope to explore some genuine villainy, instead the character delved into the cliche world of Nazi bad guy strudel.
I enjoyed this read immensely but it remains for me a major ‘if only’ science fiction novel.
Was it worth the read? Yes, with a smidgen of disappointment.
Haldeman fans will forgive, others may not.
There Is No Darkness
This novel was my first introduction to the Haldemans. Coauthored by brothers Joe and Jack, it is still one of my favourite works of science fiction.
Carl Bok is a student of Starschool. Because he’s from Springworld, a heavy gravity planet with harsh weather and wildlife, he bigger than your average pupil and a lot poorer. All he has is his pride and something to prove.
On the Earth leg of the excursion, he gets involved in prise fighting, unintentionally roping in his roommates. They fight tournament after tournament, but even though he loses in the end, Carl learns a lesson in fealty.
Next, they visit a planet called Hell. This is where sovereign governments go to fight their conventional, regulated wars. Carl and his colleagues, who are now his friends, are kidnapped and forced to serve in a mercenary army.
Then they travel to The Construct, an ancient alien artefact that has become a hub for hundreds of alien species who’ve set up shop to trade information.
The best aspect of this book is Carl’s growing friendship with the other students. They are each funny and charming in their own way, as they band together to face a brave new universe.
This will resonate with fans as much as any other of his work.
