Conservatives must have relaxed the drug laws slightly to come to this conclusion, that penguins somehow represent conservative values. Earlier in the Fall, the New York Times also mused on the rise of conservative movies, wondering whether a few recent movies viewed as having conservative values should be “interpreted as peace offerings in the culture wars, or as canny attempts to open a new front in the endless battle for the soul of the American public?” Since most American media members see the world as liberal and everything-not-liberal-as-conservative, lumping The Incredibles as a “conservative” movie demonstrates a Procrustian worldview. And yet, there is a conservative movement out there, far-reaching and ambitious, that could co-opt or take down libertarian ideas entirely in the public’s mind. Witness Libertas, which throws around the word “liberty,” yet also advertises itself as a “forum for conservative though on film.” No wonder the modern left sees libertarians as part of the conservative movement: no one talks liberty as much and loudly as the conservatives, while trampling gleefully on individual freedom at the same time.

Today I received in a mail a copy of 3000 Years, a novel by Richard Mgrdechian published this year. I plan on digging into the book right away, posting a brief review here, and then probably a longer review in the print edition of Prometheus in a few months – yes, hard to believe in our internet age, but print newsletters still exist. Published quarterly, at around 16 pages per issue, Prometheus has been around under various editors since 1982, nearly 25 years now. The Fall newsletter should be in the mail to LFS members, subscribers, and friends Any Day Now. Send me an email if you’re interested in getting a sample copy.

Another entry from the “books not yet read” department, Michael L. Wentz‘s new novel (published October 6, 2005), Resurrection of Liberty. The description makes it sound like a space opera/young adult adventure story amid a background where “freedom has been leached from the galaxy, replaced with slavery, oppression, and destruction.”

By strange coincidence (see earlier post) I came across this article from the 1997 edition of the first ever issue of The Heinlein Journal. Sf critic Farah Mendlesohn places some comments about Heinlein’s “feminism” in context, and provides insight into the decline of strong female roles in sf during the 1940s and 1950s. One can argue that this falls into a greater social contraction in media with the rise of movie Production Codes, strict editorial guidelines, and crackdown on comic books. Heinlein appears to emerge as the only writer of that era to grant his female characters greater roles, but no doubt there are others out there, too.

[cross-posted at Liberty and Power] Thanks to David Beito for the guest blogging opportunity.

With the Heinlein Centenary celebrations scheduled for July 7, 2007, more and more stories about sf writer Robert A. Heinlein will start to surface. Long criticized by liberals, Heinlein (seen by many fans, writers, and critics as the first libertarian sf writer), gets a nod over at the New York Times (registration required) for his radical ideas instead of the usual reactionary claims. M.G. Lord’s essay hints that Heinlein’s radical ideas about women found better expressions in his earlier works, especially the less serious juvenile stories. Lord even praises parts of Starship Troopers, often mis-read as a “fascist” and “militaristic” work. Several of Heinlein’s young female characters indeed appeared more capable and individualistic than their male counterparts, and tended to remind me of Harper Lee’s Scout, from To Kill a Mockingbird. This may be a matter of opinion, but I tend to agree with the contrast between Heinlein’s earlier and later books; works published after 1970 grew longer and more complex, but at the same time less interesting.

A few negative comments have emerged from people who saw the movie. Claire Wolfe’s disappointment is two-fold. She believes it was better as a TV series, and thought a particular scene derivative. I tend to respect Wolfe’s comments, but the scene to which she alludes, where Serenity arrives at Mr. Universe’s planet to find an Armanda of Alliance ships, and somehow manages to surprise and slip past them, by no means originated with Galaxy Quest. Although the title eludes me, I seem to remember a Western movie where stampeding cattle was used much in the same way.

Seth Stevenson at Slate shares the same view. The idea that Whedon should stick to television comes from the perception that Whedon’s “nuanced characters with complex, long-running relationships” are better suited to long-running TV shows rather than a two-hour feature film. Wolfe voices this as you ” can’t just scale up a TV series and call it a movie.” Stevenson even quotes Whedon, who once said, “Why are the best writers in TV? Because they can control their product. They’re given something resembling respect.” Of course, the way Fox killed Firefly after Whedon garnered mucho respect disproved this statement. Whedon had limited control over his product, as executives demanded changes to Mal’s character, kyboshed the original pilot for “more action,” and dropped the show mid-way through the season. Another argument brought up for why TV is a horrible medium is actually raised as praise by Stevenson:

Whedon has killed off his shows’ major characters, then resurrected them—repeatedly. He turned Buffy’s friend Willow gay, then made her into a murderous hellion, then turned her sweet and good again. But even as Buffy’s plots whirligigged around, the characters remained self-aware, and the banter remained off-handed and cute.

I suppose that if Firefly had lived, Zoe and Jayne might have gotten together, and Simon turned out to be an Alliance spy, killing Kaylee and running off with Inara. Such are the downfalls of TV and episodic shows with no defined story arc, as the current show Lost demonstrates. Who knows where it’s going? Not even the writers themselves, I fear. Each episode of Firefly, 43 minutes in length once you snip out commercials, is barely enough to tell a small story or two. One could see the greater story arcs building in some episodes, but other episodes sacrificed this story to bring up more sex and violence, often with little or no character development. Serenity, at around 120 minutes (or three times the length of one Firefly episode), can show more of the major plot, but also (like any single episode), tends to focus on core characters. The ensemble cast of nine, plus two other supporting characters, must share precious time. Another movie with a fellowship of nine could give more time to each member over nearly ten hours, but not so in the constrained allotment of a single movie.

Box Office Mojo calls the movie “more episodic (and cacophonous) than cinematic” and an “obnoxiously loud movie.” Serenity is merely a “cowboys and Indians space adventure.” Box Office Mojo also listed preliminary numbers of $3.9 mil from Friday, second behind the more famous Jodie Foster’s Flightplan, which is good news for Whedon and Universal. Other than failing to hear occasional dialog, I found the movie at times serene, never “cacophonous.”

On the other hand, most mainstream reviews have been positive. Two thumbs up from Roper and Ebert, for example. Elsewhere I was taken to task for mentioning the movie in terms of “genre,” yet almost every reviewer has mentioned Serenity in terms of its science fiction elements (the local San Antonio paper managed to do this in each of the first seven paragraphs of its positive review). Much has been made of Whedon’s blend of Western and SF. Yet there are elements of siege movies (Zulu, Alamo), and horror (Dawn of the Dead), as well as space resembling the sea, with pirates, sharks, and killing grounds. Genre definitions can be limiting, yet also there are certain things you can do within the scope of SF movies than other genres don’t really allow. Taking pieces from recognizable themes is no sin. For a movie with a $40 million budget, some effects fail to meet Industrial Light and Magic standards, yet the plot, dialog, and characters stand far above any recent Star Wars movie.

As for my last words, I’d acknowledge that some of the characters received less time and development than others. Yet again, given two hours and a story to tell, the writer has to make a choice. Bemoan not unfulfilled anticipations of what could have been, but rather examine the actual result. If there is no more Serenity, no more Firefly, Whedon has told his story. Events that might have happened in season two or three of a TV show all came to a head in this movie, for good or bad. I think aside from the Mr. Universe plot and how a couple of characters seemed more whiny than on the show, that Serenity was a damned good movie. Having seen it twice my opinions have not changed. And so, no more blog entries for me on this movie, until news of a possible sequel is announced.

Tuesday night I watched a special screening of Serenity, wrangling an invite as a blogger. I arrived to find a long line at the theatre, which initially puzzled me as some people talking in line had no idea of Serenity or Firefly, the Fox TV show that died and was reborn out of the ashes as a Universal Pictures movie. It turns out many of the people there got free tickets through a community paper or a radio station, both co-sponsors of the event; I watched the movie from a Press row. After one brief preview, the movie opened, taking you straight into the narrative much like the TV show.

Writer/director Joss Whedon is best known for his other TV shows, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and its spin-off, Angel. I confess that I am fan of neither, and when Firefly debuted on the small screen in 2002, I probably contributed to the show’s demise, as prejudiced by my disregard of Whedon’s other work, I did not watch a single episode. The Fox network abruptly cancelled Firefly after less than a dozen episodes.

TV is a poor medium for narrative sf, in my opinion. Run a series long enough, and desperate writers will wring every possible option and angle out of the show, just to keep the audience guessing and interested. There’s maybe one or two exceptions out there, Babylon 5 being the best of these. That show was written by one person, with pre-determined story arcs and a five-year lifetime. Yet even Babylon 5 could not escape the other reason TV shows in general fail—life exists year to year on TV, and often far less—and while B5 lived its planned five years, the last one was never assured, and it showed. Deviate from what network execs think sell—sex and action—and you’re gone. Firefly never really fell into line with the network, I guess, because while it combined two known genres, the Western and science fiction, it did so in ways that defied both genres, and blended quirky humor to boot.

Serenity, as a movie, succeeds on virtually every level. Due to the scale, it’s far grander than anything the TV screen could offer. You can feel the ship shake and groan through atmosphere. The light is sharper, and the depths of colors more vibrant, the sounds and silences more menacing. The actors seem unaffected by the change to the bigger medium, and put in strong performances. Newcomer Chiwetel Ejiofor, as the Alliance operative with no name, lends a new depth to the story and characters.

The basis for Serenity‘s universe is one where a strong government (the Alliance) manages most of the core planets, with the edges often left to less-civilized people, some who just want to be left along, others who ravage space and feast on other humans. The crew of Serenity includes Captain Malcom “Mal” Reynolds (Nathan Fillion), a cynical foe of the Alliance who inspires great loyalty in his crew; first mate Zoe Warren (Gina Torres), tough as nails and married to the pilot, Hoban “Wash” Washburn (Alan Tudyk), who is seemingly out of place among this often violent crew. The main violent guy is Jayne Cobb (Adam Baldwin), a mercenary not afraid to challenge Mal’s authority. The ship is held together by a sweet engineer, Kaylee (Jewel Staite), also in love with the aloof doctor who’s also River’s brother, Simon (Sean Maher). Former shipmates include Inara (Morena Baccarin), a companion (the term prostitute approximates her role, but very high class, and a different basis for getting clientele), and finally Book (Ron Glass), a preacher and spiritual guide.

Whedon has chosen to focus initially on the 17-year old River (Summer Glau), the gifted, psychotic young girl liberated from the Alliance scientists by her brother. As the movie opens we see a recording of the rescue scene, setting the stage for the Operative, who is tasked with retrieving and killing River. For, as we learn, River carries a dark secret that cannot be exposed. Meanwhile, Mal takes River along on a job, perhaps as part of the process of integrating her into the crew. Inara and Book have left, and the Alliance presses ever harder around Mal, sending him further and further toward the edges of space and legality in search of jobs.

During the job with River, the savage and cannibalistic Reavers attack, bringing to the fore another story thread. What caused humans to become Reavers? Were they unable to face “vasty space” to use Kaylee’s term, or could another calamity be at the root? As the Operative closes in on Mal and the crew of Serenity, something triggers River’s latent combat abilities, marking them on security cameras. A deeper memory also surfaces, one that leads them all to a horrific, and to some regards final, battle after uncovering the terrible secret the River bears.

This movie is important in many ways. First, it’s brilliantly filmed science fiction with few gimmicks, born through superb writing that contains both humor and heart wrenching tragedy. Whedon manages to involve the audience, which laughed at times, and applauded at the end. The effects do not disappoint, but unlike many other sf movies, they overwhelm neither the dialog not the plot. At heart lies a strong plot, that of uncovering government secrets, and what lies at the heart of this particular secret: the desire for control, for “a better world,” as the Operative states, and the result of such attempted control. At what cost one asks? Good intentions often result in horrific consequences, and here we see the root of all government, the idea that some people think they know what’s best for others, and will do anything in their power to enforce that behavior. Serenity stands as one of the most entertaining, thoughtful, and best written movies in many years. It’s not without a few flaws, but I hope one day we’ll see more of Serenity’s crew, but if this is the end of Whedon’s special ‘Verse, well, no other movie made a better showing of what it had. Serenity gives no quarter, and pulls no punches.

I avoided this story before seeing Serenity due to the presence of spoilers. You have been warned. However, skip the first paragraph that contains the spoiler material, and the rest of the story contains some interesting comments from Joss Whedon, writer/director of Serenity. Of particular interest is this quote, which says as much about his movie as it does about TV in general, and why I really don’t watch that many TV shows. Not that I don’t like questions, but I don’t like the lack of direction in TV shows, where an answer one day is a question the next, all subject to change at any moment.

[T]he difference between TV and movies is that TV shows are a question, and movies are an answer. And so in this we had to have a definitive statement about freedom and humanity and what we need and what we should be allowed to have as people, which is all our flaws. And then I answer that. I make a definitive statement. I put a period or, hopefully, an exclamation point on that, as opposed to just sort of pursuing the question for years, which is what a TV show would do.

Occasional fiction collaborators Brad Linaweaver (Prometheus Awarding winning author of Moon of Ice and most recently the Spanish Civil War alternate history, Anarquia), and Daffyd ab Hugh (four Doom novels with Linaweaver, many other fantasy and sf works), have launched a blog, Big Lizards. The site appears brand new this month (September 16) and under heavy construction. Peruse with caution.

Sunni Maravillosa reviews a couple of books by Wolf DeVoon at the September issue of Sunni’s Salon. I have not yet checked out the novels, but they appear electronic copies, not print. Personally, my favorite Mars fiction is written by Norwegain sf writer Øyvind Myhre, of whose books I have read both though I own only the more recent one: English title Stars Over Tharsis. A couple of Myhre’s short stories did see print in English, one in an obscure DAW Books collection many years ago, the other in the special sf issue of New Libertarian; fittingly this was the Heinlein tribute issue. It’s possible copies of this are available for purchase from Victor Koman at his Triplanetary Traders web page. Koman, of course, is the multiple Prometheus Award-winning author of (among others) Kings of the High Frontier another novel which began in electronic form only, but saw print in a wonderful limited edition a few years ago. That novel remains perhaps the best work of any kind on private space travel. I believe it’s still available from the original publisher, Pulpless.com