Geekklesia

(This is the text of an audio review I provided to The Spirit Blade Underground podcast.  You can find the episode here .) Metropolis is not the first science fiction film. According to my copy of Phil Hardy’s The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction Movies (1984), that honor goes to the Lumiere short film “The Mechanical Butcher,”  produced in 1895. It is, however, probably one of the most important science fiction films in history.  Its influence is seen in many films even down to what we might call the modern era. German film director Fritz Lang had just completed an epic six-hour film version of the Nibelungenlied that was critically as well publicly well-received. To follow up, he wanted to make a film about the future. 1 He and his (then) wife, the writer Thea von Harbou, set about working on the story of class struggle that would become the core of Metropolis.  When he and von Harbou and producer Erich Pommer traveled to New York to promote Die Nibelungen ...

By “pre-2001,” I mean films that were released before 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) I selected these films using Phil Hardy’s Encyclopedia of Science Fiction Movies (1984), as well as my classroom experience in college.  As with most lists of this nature, the choices are mostly subjective, but they do seem to be backed up by critical comments throughout film history, and especially SF film history. My criteria were simple: -> The film had to be released prior to 2001; -> The film could not be a serial; -> The film must not be a sequel; -> The film must be generally available for viewing A Trip to the Moon 1902 Die Spinnen (The Spiders) 1919 Der Golem 1920 The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari 1920 Dr. Mabuse der Spieler (Dr. Mabuse: The Gambler) 1922 Nosferatu 1922 Phantom of the Opera 1925 Metropolis 1927 Spione (The Spies) 1928 Frankenstein 1931 Dracula 1931 Island of Lost Souls 1932 The Mummy 1932 White Zombie 1932 Ki...

Recently, I found myself keeping house alone while the Princess Bride was away for a few days.  I took advantage of the opportunity to catch up on some of the TV shows I find interesting, but don’t watch as the two of us are fans of other shows. One of those shows is the BBC America series based on (and sharing the same title with) the popular podcast, The Nerdist .  The particular episode I was watching featured ‘ Nerd Girls .’  One guest in particular was actress, writer, producer, gamer and all-around queen nerd, Felicia Day .  She was asked about her hit internet series, The Guild, and had something interesting to say about why she gravitated toward new media over traditional media. Now, I’m paraphrasing here, but her comment was something along the lines of how much fun it was and how satisfying it was to create something, share it with people who enjoy it, and how these same folks receive, discuss it, internalize it, and then give back to the community. ...

I’ve been reading Douglas Cowan’s Sacred Space: The Quest for Transcendence in Science Fiction Film and Television (Baylor University Press, 2010) and the first chapter really got my attention in a way that I didn’t expect.  The author states “…transcendence is not a function of sensation, but of relationship, and the reciprocal boundaries between those who exist in a relationship” (p. 40) and “…relationship is the key to encountering an Other” (P 41). These two quotes in particular started me thinking about humanity in general. If the key to transcendence really is relationship, then I think that puts a whole different spin on the story of the Fall found in Genesis 3.  There, we see that God created Adam and Eve as a special part of His creation. He did not call them into existence, but formed them Himself (Genesis 2:7). Mankind was endowed with the “image of God,” which involved much more than the notion that we looked like Him, but rather carried His character. And soon...

Once again I find myself unable to make my self-imposed deadline for this space. Happily, I did receive an interesting link to a great media review blog that celebrates Max's 25th here: http://www.onthemedia.org/blogs/on-the-media/2012/may/25/max-headroom/ Enjoy!

Having watched the entire series thanks to Shout Factory’s release of the complete series on DVD, I have noticed that there are some six distinct shade of morality present in the series. Morally Bankrupt Ned Grossberg, the original chair of Network 23 is clearly the most morally bankrupt person in the series. He was ousted as the chair of the largest network in the world after he authorized the failed Blipvert campaign. The blipvert technology compressed an entire 30-second advertisement into a fraction of that time. The intended result was the prevention of channel switching, thus ensuring Network 23’s hold on the ratings lead, but what actually happened was that particularly sedentary viewers had a nasty habit of spontaneously combusting because they’re nerve endings were over stimulated by the blipverts. Grossberg refused to pull them, choosing to profit above people.  He later resurfaces as the chairman of Network 66, a rival of Network 23.  Not long after joining...

For regular visitors to this site, the regularly-scheduled Max Headroom post for this week has been pre-empted. It will return next week. In the meantime, take a look at this excellent post from 18 months ago:   http://friday87central.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/maxheadroom/ Note: where the author refers to the creator of Max Headroom as "George Strong" it should be "George Stone."