Fallout [short film]

This has nothing to do with the game "Fallout", though I found this article and series of links on the No Mutants Allowed Fallout site:

Fallout, a PA movie short
Posted by Kharn - at 2:12

Here's something we missed; in 2003, William Joines did a short entitled "Fallout" for his junior thesis project. After watching it, I can only conclude that the 15-minute $650 dollar short is an excellent piece of work, with some really impressive acting and set-building.

The basic premise is that of a little girl waking up in an empty and damaged fallout shelter with her memory gone and we watch her as she tries to survive and regain her memories, locked in the shelter. The short was shown on the Riverrun Film Festival and was a Student Academy Award Nominee.

Be sure to check it out as you can see the whole thing on Will Joines' website

Link: Fallout page on Will Joines' website

Link: in case any of you ever want to build a bunker set, here's how to do it; John Steckley set-building page

After checking with the director, we can verify that there's no relation the the Fallout game. Spotted on Fallout.ru

..................................

If you're into short films, post-apocalyptic/sci-fi/survival stories, or just want to see a neat and well done story about a little girl with lost memories, check it out. Very very cool - I wish I'd put more time into the film projects I had to do as electives at my college. ;) Very atmospheric.

Files are .mov format, the large file took me around an hour to download on DSL.

Tipping the Velvet [film]

So these are just my impressions of the mini-series version of "Tipping the Velvet" and my comparison between it and the original novel. Spoilers Abound for the film and the novel!


First Impression
At first I wasn't too sure about the score choice - but I hadn't seen what the tone of the series was yet. The music seems typical of what I've seen of other BBC series', but I just assumed since TtV is a period story that it would have period music. But by the end of the show, the music had grown on me and I kinda like it now. Heh.

Another first impression: Nan's hair. I don't know what it is with me, but in most books I read, I always somehow miss the part where the author says what color the protagonist's hair is. When I read TtV, I pictured Nan's hair as blonde. Off the top of anyone's head, do you know what color it was in the book?

Series style versus the book mood
At first I wasn't sure how to feel about the fact that the series is SO much lighter than the book. The novel is so dark, brooding, and erotic whereas the series shows these dark things but makes dark humour out of it with the music and Nan's narrative and expressions. (Ok, it's not as dark and erotic as Kushiel's Dart or either of Sarah Waters' other two books, but I just mean in comparision to the series...)After seeing the whole thing I realised that if they HAD done the series with the same mood as the book, with the same drama, it probably would never of made it to television - at least not with more cut out and an NC-17 rating. And this was more or less referred to by Sarah Waters as well, at least in her suprise that TtV was going to be made into a series on the BBC.

Characters
Nan
I liked the gal who played Nan (I'm bad with names, I don't remember who it was). I thought she had good body language and was into the role - maybe I'm just jaded by American TV mini series' and the crappy acting they can have, but I was warmly suprised. She also had a good voice to play Nan - she could convincingly lower it to sound more masculine. Combined with the way she carried herself, she made a good pair with Kitty like in the book... How Nan looked TOO convincing as a male, way better than Kitty, so they had to tone her down.

My only small gripe with Nan was that she was still too feminine - her arched eyebrows, her very feminine eyes and shapely lips. I don't think they could of done a WHOLE ton to change that to make her like the Nan in the book, who was NOT distinctly female. I know women who look like boys and she was not it. The only thing that really saved it from totally pissing me off is the fact that the way a lot of things were portrayed in the film were symbolic - the cartoonish special effects, the obviously plastic roses, the music.

One thing they had NO excuse for, though, was putting Nan back in a dress at the end! In the book, she decides what is comfortable for HER. This time it's not her boss's decision, it's not her empty stomach demanding, and it's not her mistress's command -- it's Nan's decision to wear men's clothes. I found this element of the book significant because it represents Nan's coming to terms with herself and her past and how she represents herself thus in the real world. And there was no reason at all that they'd NOT do that in the series at all - I mean, they were halfway there when Nan narrates the part where she gets mens clothes in which to do housework and she gets her hair trimmed. After that I fully expected her to stay in men's clothes from then on like in the book.

Kitty
This is just me, I always pictured Kitty as a bit less feminine in apperance, but I thought she was striking in the role, particularly when she would prepare for the tossing of her rose. And combined with Nan in their double act... wow.

Diana
Perfect. Although I don't remember Diana ever saying anything about love in the novel - it was all about control and power, not about love. I think they changed it up a little in the series for two reasons - one, to lighten the doom/gloomness of how it really was living with Diana Lethaby. Secondly, to make Nan's leaving more of a triumph rather than the skidding of a street sex junkie hitting bottom like it was in the book. Because in the series, the story was more about Nan's eventual and gradual triumph over life's shit. More on that later.

Walter
whoops, forgot him. Of course, his role was really minimized, but he was too old! Eeeewww! Although, Kitty was older in the series, too, so it wasn't so bad. ;) he was good, though - just the right parts of nice and a bit sleazy.

Florence
Florence was the only person I really had a problem with, but it has to do with the way they totally flipped her part around in order to highlight Nan's triumph in the series. In the book, Flo was much more standoffish and rigid toward Nan. In the film she came off as inexperienced - which she was. But in the book, she knew MORE than Nan did about the REAL world. Nan had only ever experienced life through the fantasy worlds of the stage, of the underbelly of the street, and of the slavery of living under Diana Lethaby's thumb. None of these places were like the real world and none of them had REAL people in them either. In the book, it is almost a shock when the reader and Nan hit this straight stretch of normality. Housework. Politics. Regular social activities. Family life. Nan had forgotten how to behave in that kind of world, and she especially had never been queer in the real world, either, which was the biggest change, I think.

I think they changed Flo because of what the series was going for. If they had totally copied the book, it wouldn't of worked. Novels can get away with things, with the lengthy descriptions and emotions that just don't work with the limited time frame of television. So the pacing was changed considerably - it picks up the pace, which also picks up the mood. And so the end result of the story had to hit a higher note than the novel.

The pacing, the plot changes
In the novel, Nan is rarely an instigator; she's a follower. She didn't really have big dreams. She had a boyfriend because that's what you're supposed to do. Then she saw Kitty and the obsession began - and she followed Kitty to London. She followed Kitty's advice and the instruction of Walter in becoming Nan King, the performer, and when her heart was broken, Nan ran chaotically to the streets. Without any guidance, she simply roamed until, once again, upon the 'invitation' of another person, she was persuaded into a new occupation, a sex worker. Then she was basically kidnapped by Diana, held hostage by her desire to BE desired, to run away from the memory of Kitty by spending all her time in another woman's arms. And when Nan finally stands up for herself she's thrown out in the street where she wretchedly hits absolute bottom until she finds Florence. Struggle after struggle...

It's funny how she ended up staying with Florence - kind of the same way she ended up with Kitty, by constantly being around until the other person simply can't do without you, and KNOWING this is what you're doing.

and then the final big responsibility of choosing where to be, where to live, who to be friends with and then confronting the people from her past who changed her the most. Confronting and triumphing in spirit and destiny. This is how the novel works.

And it would of been rather boring as a mini series, if you think about it.

So in the series, Nan is a bit more proactive in her destiny. Nan wasn't bitter about being kicked out by Diana - not like in the book. And it's Nan who is wise about the world in the end, not Flo. And the end - the end was perfect. With the single toss of a rose, Nan cuts off her past completely to start life anew.

Conclusion
I'm always a larger fan of the book than of the film as far as these things go, because it seems no matter how they do it, the characters in the books, the emotions, are much more personal and intimate. But they did a really good job with TtV. It usually seems there are three possible results with tv movies made from books. They either come out EXACTLY like it, and thus dull; they come out SO different that there's not much relation between the two and thus the book-fans are completely alienated; or it just comes out cheesy. And luckily, TtV is none of those.

The stage performances
Oh! I forgot to say - another great thing I liked about the series, another thing Sarah Waters mentioned in the interview. The singing and dancing! I'm normally not a musical fan, but it's like Sarah said - in the book, the performances are spoken of, but you don't get to see it, to hear it, to see the reaction of the crowd. Its a totally different experience that was great to be able to see. I got a much better idea of what that kind of performance would of been to an audience back then.

I also loved how the WAY the songs were performed changed to kind of fit the story and mood... In the beginning we have the lone Kitty Butler, and she's good. Light, sleek and charming. A strong first impression. Then we get the duo of Kitty and Nan, the teamwork, the connection, the DANCE, the lighthearted joy. Next we get the utter bottom-feeder performance between Kitty and Walter with Kitty portraying Walter's son. It was just WRONG in the book and it was just wrong in the series. In both formats, you could feel Nan cringe upon seeing it and I did, too. Ugh - where is life going to?

And finally, we have Nan's comeback performance. She was SO timid in the beginning and every single ounce of strength she'd gained through all she'd been through came out in that performance. Compare it to the first performance by Kitty and Nan just blows it out of the water. She's far more confident and bold. I'm not sure if this was intentional, if they toned down the past performances, or if the gal who played Nan was seriously just better than the gal who played Kitty, but I think it really clinched the ending.

The sex
I was pleasantly suprised by the quality of the sex scenes. I'm so tired of halfhearted lesbian performances that come off like straight male fantasies. I'm tired of over-the-top "oooh, I'm so into you" acting that just ruins the humanity of what is going on between the characters. Yay for sex! :D

The flashbacks
I also really liked the useage of the flashbacks Nan would have of Kitty. It really helped highlight Nan's perpetual heartache and keep it emotionally true, like in the book. I could relate to that. So that when we got to the end and Nan makes her choice between Kitty and Flo, the choice is that much more dramatic. I actually found myself wondering over who she'd choose, though I knew damn well that Nan chooses Flo in the novel. ;) So that's a mark of good storytelling in my book. :D

Jarhead [novel]

I finished Jarhead: A Marine's Chronicle of the Gulf War and Other Battles by Anthony Swafford. It's very from-the-gut, dark, and doesn't pull any punches. It tells of the author's unwavering drive to become a Marine and of the reality of the hell of actually BEING one and living through a war that wasn't a war out in the desert.

The book doesn't offer up any excuses, it doesn't really give you any trivial information, and it doesn't really give up any deep insights. It simply tells of what it was like, what the other Marines were like, some things he thought of during the things he went through and tells factually the things he saw and did, letting the reader take everything for what it is. War. Meaningless war. Neither pro nor anti anything. Gives you a lot to think about.

I liked the matter-of-factness of the book - makes it a balanced read for people both pro and anti war. War is what it is and this was one man's experience of it. Kind of makes my stomach lurch whenever I read a "Semper Fi" bumper sticker, though. Urgh.

The Radioactive Boy Scout

The Radioactive Boy Scout - The True Story of a Boy and His Backyard Nuclear Reactor by Ken Silverstein

I just read this book yesterday, got it out of the library and finished it the same day, which is something for me, as I usually take my time with books. But I HAD to know what happened to David Hahn, the teen who attempted to build a model nuclear breeder reactor in a potting shed in his backyard in Detroit in the 90's.

I've always had a strange fascination with radioactivity, both the facts and the fantasy of it. I don't know why; in reality it scares the bejeebers out of me yet I find information and stories about it really interesting. The history of Chernobyl, the Bikini Atol, the tests in Nevada. Post-apocalyptic fiction, particulary post nuclear-apocalyptic stories, I can't get enough of - like Z for Zachariah. The "Fallout" RPG games - getting to BE a character in this neo-retro post apocalyptic nuclear world. Films, no matter how cheesy - "The Postman", "Mad Max", the one realistic film that was made to scare people about nuclear destruction that follows some individuals trying to survive after a nuclear attack whose name I always forget...

And what makes this book even better/scarier is that it really HAPPENED.

The book was written by an investigative reporter and doesn't just tell David Hahn's story, how he managed to build something that generated extremely large amounts of radiation levels measurable from several blocks away - it also tells us the history of radioactive materials and their scientific discoveries and uses and the history of the damaging effects various radioactive materials have caused. It tells us about how the government put a happy face on atomic energy and how it was this very out-of-date information that under-informed David enough to go through with much of his experimenting. Lastly, the book details David's family life and how he was able to get away with so much with so little supervision. It's absolutely stunning and really amazing. This teenager was a chemistry genius who was figured out how to procure all kinds of highly restricted radioactive material -- and it's not an evil genius story, just a kid obsessed with a project whose consequences he never really thought about or informed himself about.

Anyway. Good read - I'm not a chemistry buff and the technical stuff was written so I could understand it but without talking down to its audience. And you really feel for David - if only his parents were more supportive, etc.

How the Sun Works in Alaska

It isn't dark here all the time, just to get that out of the way. ;) But it DOES get dark in the winter.

It's just like anywhere else in the world that is a significant distance from the equator. As winter approaches in the northern hemisphere, the earth tilts AWAY from the sun on its axis. This makes the sun appear lower on the horizon. The further from the equator you go in the winter, the shorter the days will be. The opposite is true for summer, though, and people tend to forget that. As summer approaches, the earth tilts toward the sun and we get more sunlight; the sun appears higher in the sky, and the days grow longer.

But it's not just a half-and-half jump. (You wouldn't BELIEVE how many people think this). It's a gradual thing.

Ok. Anchorage is the closest place to me on this sunlight chart - the daylight hours are a bit different for Palmer because we're surrounded by mountains. Fairbanks is a little less than halfway up the body of the state heading north, and Barrow is the farthest town North in the US. But you get the idea of the angle affecting hours of light from this chart:

Maximum Daylight Hrs. at Summer Solstice (June 20 or 21)
Anchorage
Sunrise - 3:21am
Sunset - 10:42pm
Hrs. of daylight - 19:21hrs

Fairbanks
Sunrise - 1:59am
Sunset - 11:48pm
Hrs. of daylight - 21:49

Barrow
Sunrise - May 10
Sunset - Aug 2
Hrs. of daylight - continuous

Yes. So the sun literally goes in circles around the sky in Barrow. You can get photos of this, timelapse. Now for the darker days..

Minimum Daylight Hours at Winter Solstice (Dec. 21 or 22)
Anchorage
Sunrise - 10:14am
Sunset - 3:42pm
Hrs. of daylight - 5:28

Fairbanks
Sunrise - 10:59am
Sunset - 2:41pm
Hrs. daylight - 3:42

Barrow
The sun sets November 18th and does not rise until January 24 for a period of 67 days in which there is NO daylight in Barrow.


The boundary for this is the Arctic Circle. Starting at this level of lattitude, there is one day where the sun does not set in the summer. From there north, the amount of days with Midnight Sun increases. Fairbanks isn't far from the Arctic Circle, so they get a lot of daylight.

And even though the sun goes below the horizon in the summer, it doesn't get DARK. It's kind of dusky. In some places, it's still bright enough to read without straining your eyes or anything. Geography has a lot to do with it - mountains to the north of you will make it darker out, but for the most part, anyplace north of Anchorage doesn't ever get DARK out in the middle of summer.

As for winter, that's another thing. The sun doesn't technically RISE in Palmer til even later because the mountains are so tall and they're RIGHT there. And closer to Solstice, the sun barely scrapes along the tops of the mountains to the south, even going behind Pioneer Peak if you're in town. Today I noticed that the sun is about a hand's width above the same mountains in the middle of the day now. Certainly seems cheerier with the increased amount of light.

Funny, because it used to not really bother me. Or maybe I just never noticed. Or maybe I've been too busy in the past to let the lack of light depress me or something. One thing's for sure, in the winter with the sun so low on the horizon, you get KILLER sunsets and sunrises ALL the time. :D

This may all seem completely fascinating to folks who have never thought about it before. Equally it might seem totally logial and not that interesting. I choose to enjoy and relish the little things like this that are around me daily - it enriches my surroundings and makes the universe seem that much more special and interesting. It's fun to mark how much daylight we've got and it adds to the uniqueness of each season. Some people complain about the amount of darkness in the winter but personally I find it cozy and magical, just as I find the summer daylight envigorating.

Just my three bingles' worth.

The Aviator [film]

No spoilers.

We saw the Aviator in the theatre yesterday. I love aviation and aviation history, so yay! Of course, you should know ahead of time that it's not simply about Howard Huges, but also about his OCD and other mental problems he suffered from, which I think are a testiment to what he went through to still create the things he did. Not to condone any of the iffier things he did, but you gotta feel for the guy in some way. The whole film makes you squirm because of that, but soar whenever Huges gets into a plane - which I'm sure is how HE felt, as well.

And I couldn't wipe the grin off my face at the Spruce Goose parts - I've seen the real Goose all rebuilt down in McMinville and it is something to see at 5 stories high with the widest wingspan of any aircraft EVER built - you could use ONE of the wings as an airstrip for a Piper Cub.

And Cate Blanchette as Katherine Hepburn? Wow, she was fantastic - what a remarkable actress.

So, not necessarily a film you HAVE to see in the theatre, although it looked like it was filmed in cinemascope (the widest ratio they generally film at). Any part showing flying aircraft was much better on the big screen, I'm sure - especially parts with the HK-1 (alternately H-4 or Spruce Goose) because of it's size - it was meant for the big screen.

Affinity [novel]

In short, if you haven't read it, you should. Get it from the library, borrow it - something. You will be amazed, whether you like it or not (this falling into the 'mindfuck' category).

From Wikipedia: Margaret Prior (also called "Peggy" and "Aurora"), an unmarried woman from an upper class family, visits the Millbank Prison in the 1870s Victorian era England. The protagonist is an overall unhappy person, recovering from her father's death and her subsequent failed suicide attempt, and struggling with her lack of power living at home with her overinvolved mother despite being almost 30. She becomes a "Lady Visitor" of the prison, hoping to escape her troubles and be a guiding figure in the lives of the female prisoners. As she peers through a flap in the door, entranced by the sight of a girl with a flower — she is reminded of a Carlo Crivelli painting. Of all her friendships with prisoners, she is most fascinated by this girl, who she learns to be Selina Dawes, medium of spirits.

It is a Sarah Water's book, so you know that there is a woman/woman relationship involved in the character development. This story slowly unfolds, teasing the reader along. The setting is wonderful, you feel like you're going behind the scenes of a Jane Austen story to see what life was REALLY like beneath the frills and pomp - gritty and real.

DO NOT READ THE REST OF THIS POST unless you have read the book. I'm serious - you'd be so spoiled, it wouldn't be worth reading. It'd be like knowing the entire mystery and how it works BEFORE you read the mystery. In other words, there'd be no suspense, no wonderment - it'd be ruined. This means YOU.

~==~
Ok. I hope if you are reading this, you have read the book.

Hope, you were, by the way, correct in that I want to stab the author. And hug her at the same time, though, for writing so craftily what she wrote.

I feel so... gullible and tricked. It's so amazing - right at the beginning of the book, we see signs of why Selina Dawes isn't to be trusted. I was hesitant to believe her, but as surely and slowly as Miss Prior fell for her, so did I. It was SO slow and so elegant, the way the reader is drawn in - it takes over half the book before anything huge happens. Very realistic to the end in how we think everything is as it appears to be, right up to the moment the mirror is shattered, the curtains taken away and we see the world for how it really is. And in that split moment, everything seems foriegn - everything we were doing just a moment before seems like it's from another life completely - a life lived in a dream world that never counted for anything. We're left so stunned we don't know what to even THINK. We want to believe in the illusion so badly because what we felt for it was so genuine... What Margaret felt for Selina was so beautiful and true, how could it of been for nothing?

Now I feel like I'm pointing out the obvious - how unbelieveably crafty Selina was. What an actress... It was even hinted at in the beginning, but I chose to believe... like Margaret, with each movement of the spirits, I chose to believe rather than try hunting down an obvious answer. It was too easy.

Even right up to the night Margaret stayed up til dawn waiting for Selina to appear - I was right there with her. I had my inner doubts - maybe she won't come. Maybe Selina was indeed delusional from her stay in the prison. Maybe the spirits simply won't be able to do it and the two will kill themselves rather than be apart. Maybe maybe maybe... But never that maybe Selina would have other plans alltogether. Even once Mrs Jelf arrived at the house and began telling of her part in Selina's escape, I thought maybe the concentration on the spirit was just a way of distracting Margaret from negative thoughts til Selina could arrive and explain everything. Then I thought, as Mrs Jelf was revealing what SHE felt of Selina - that maybe Selina really was in love with JELF and that Selina was going to arrive and there'd be a confrontation and the two would go off together.... But in the end, I really thought that Selina was going to appear and go off with Margaret. So I was just as shocked AS Margaret with each revelation of every piece to the puzzle.

And the whole time it was RUTH VIGERS?!? I couldn't even make a sound, couldn't shake my heads. I wasn't anything yet I was everything all at once, I was so stunned. Because I should of known. Somehow, I should of seen it all along.

And I feel SO gullible. Gullible. I mean, I like to be suprised in stories - books and movies and TV shows. I try NOT to guess at what is going on. Of course, often, TV and movies are easier to guess at than books. And I think, maybe I COULD of remained objective... maybe I wouldn't of fallen for it. But Selina was too good; I was drawn in and I fell for it, too.

Now I don't know what to do with the book itself. Laugh at it, glare at it? Put it on my bookshelf with my collection? I do re-read books, but this... this isn't a story to be re-read, a world to be re-visited. This book WAS an experience. And like most life experiences, things one cannot repeat. Something one cannot go back in time and recapture. It's one of those "first time" things - the first time is always the best, full of wonder and suprise. And once that's over with, even the anticipation of the end result in subsequent experiences cannot capture that naive suprise.

Anyway. Like I said, I'm a book collector - I love my books. But I honestly dont think I'd ever be able to re-read this one. Who to pass it to, then?

I'm serious... I was just BUZZING during the chapters leading up to Selina's escape.... When she got put in the darks... I was just fluttering inside. I HAD to see what happened. I couldn't stop reading. And it built and built and built -- then... It was like jumping into a glacial lake. Solid cold came over me, slowly dripping, coating me, like a giant egg cracked over my head. And all time stopped as I found out the truth to Selina's plans.

In the end, as much as I want to throttle Sarah Waters, I want to praise her as well for such a good job. To write something like that, that can DO this to a reader - that's just amazing. *shakes Sarah's hand and thanks her for holding my heart to the light, warming it, then quickly lacerating it and stomping upon it before handing it back*. I almost feel BAD for appreciating the book - like a dominatrix who suddenly realized she liked being a bottom, liked being abused all a long.

Ok, weird analogy, but it's what came to mind. :P