@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @@@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @@@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@

Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
Club Notice - 11/16/90 -- Vol. 9, No. 20

MEETINGS UPCOMING:

Unless otherwise stated, all meetings are on Wednesdays at noon.
LZ meetings are in LZ 2R-158. MT meetings are in the cafeteria.

_D_A_T_E _T_O_P_I_C

12/05/90 LZ: EQUAL RITES or THE LIGHT FANTASTIC by Terry Pratchett
(Humorous SF)
01/09/91 LZ: BRAIN WAVE by Poul Anderson (Intelligence)
01/30/91 LZ: RITE OF PASSAGE by Alexei Panshin (Adolescence)
02/20/91 LZ: MARTIANS, GO HOME! by Frederic Brown (Social Satire)
03/13/91 LZ: TOM SWIFT by Victor Appleton II (Juvenile SF)

_D_A_T_E _E_X_T_E_R_N_A_L _M_E_E_T_I_N_G_S/_C_O_N_V_E_N_T_I_O_N_S/_E_T_C.

11/17/90 NJSFS: New Jersey Science Fiction Society: Barry Malzberg
(phone 201-432-5965 for details) (Saturday)
12/08/90 SFABC: Science Fiction Association of Bergen County: TBA
(phone 201-933-2724 for details) (Saturday)

HO Chair: John Jetzt HO 1E-525 834-1563 hocpa!jetzt
LZ Chair: Rob Mitchell LZ 1B-306 576-6106 mtuxo!jrrt
MT Chair: Mark Leeper MT 3D-441 957-5619 mtgzy!leeper
HO Librarian: Tim Schroeder HO 3B-301 949-4488 hotsc!tps
LZ Librarian: Lance Larsen LZ 3L-312 576-3346 mtunq!lfl
MT Librarian: Evelyn Leeper MT 1F-329 957-2070 mtgzy!ecl
Factotum: Evelyn Leeper MT 1F-329 957-2070 mtgzy!ecl
All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.

1. This year's _M_e_m_p_h_i_s _B_e_l_l_e directed by Michael Caton-Jones
[reviewed elsewhere in this issue] is a popular film describing the
last mission of the first B-17 to complete its assigned twenty-five
missions. What has not been mentioned anywhere is that _M_e_m_p_h_i_s
_B_e_l_l_e is a partial remake of a previous film called _T_h_e _M_e_m_p_h_i_s
_B_e_l_l_e. The original was directed by one of Hollywood's great
directors, William Wyler, who directed such films as _M_r_s. _M_i_n_i_v_e_r,
_T_h_e _B_e_s_t _Y_e_a_r_s _o_f _O_u_r _L_i_v_e_s, _T_h_e _D_e_s_p_e_r_a_t_e _H_o_u_r_s, _T_h_e _B_i_g _C_o_u_n_t_r_y,
_B_e_n _H_u_r, and _F_u_n_n_y _G_i_r_l. After he completed _M_r_s. _M_i_n_i_v_e_r, Wyler
enlisted in the Army Air Corps only to be assigned to make
documentaries about the day-to-day business of the Army Air Corps.

THE MT VOID Page 2

He made two; one was _T_h_u_n_d_e_r_b_o_l_t and one was _T_h_e _M_e_m_p_h_i_s _B_e_l_l_e.
The latter was bout the B-17 crews stationed in England who bombed
Germany and used as a focal point the last mission of the Memphis
Belle. The Discovery Channel on cable just happens to be running
Wyler's _M_e_m_p_h_i_s _B_e_l_l_e this month.

[The following paragraph will include some spoilers about the 1990
movie.]

Wyler apparently went on several bombing missions to create the
documentary, though he has what is at best only a minute or so of
footage from the Belle's final flight, and that is from the landing
and taken from the ground. The 1990 films seems to have much
exaggerated the danger of the final mission. The following are
apparently inaccuracies of the later film:

- There were no injuries on the Belle on her final mission. When
she landed the crew was grinning from the windows and the glass
nose. There is a reference to a transfusion in some places but it
is not the Belle. The Belle had no fires, did not have to throw
out its guns, and was not losing fuel.

- In the original most of the planes are not named for or
illustrated with pictures of sexy women. More common are names
like "Old Bill." The nose paintings usually show cartoons of
nasty things happening to a frightened-looking Hitler.

- The 1990 film shows some spectacular collisions. The original
film does not, but probably would not mention the dangerous
mishaps.

- The 1990 production could get only eight planes. The original
gives more of a feel of an armada.

- The crew looks considerably older in the original. There are
references to crew members in their late teens, but most looked
more like mid-thirties.

- The Belle was not assigned to Bremen; it was assigned to the
submarine pens at Wilhelmshaven.

The Wyler documentary is worth seeing and makes a worthwhile
supplement to the movie. After the documentary there are
interviews with crew members who flew the B-17s. The contention is
made that this is one of the best-designed planes ever built.
Every architectural element has a backup so if it were shot away
the backup takes over. The planes could be horribly shot up and
still be in good flying condition, as both versions of the film
showed. A German flier is quoted as saying that attacking a B-17
was "like making love to a porcupine ... on fire."

Mark Leeper
MT 3D-441 957-5619
...mtgzy!leeper

THE FIRE'S STONE by Tanya Huff
A book review by Frank R. Leisti
Copyright 1990 Frank R. Leisti

This pleasant tale revolves around the characters of a thief, a
third prince and a princess, who just happens to be a Wizard of the Nine
(which is to say that she has great potential, not much experience).
The plot which weaves a fabric of deceit around the players involves the
regular political intrigue as well as mental fabric being torn asunder
and remended while on an absolutely impossible quest.

The quest is the return of the Fire's Stone, a magical stone that
took 9 wizards of the nine, 9 years to create, whose power holds back
the bubbling lava of a volcano near a great and glorious land. With the
quest these three untried and quite youthful people form new
relationships even when they do not wish to form such relationships.
The interactions between the players, the doubts of abilities, the
failings of the three make for an interesting byplay of both tearing
down and of support as the quest proceeds.

Of course, in a world where magic occurs, magical things are quite
likely to turn out to the benefit of the right and this story is no
exception. So in this regards, the story is rather lame and
unappealing. Matching the psychological description of the various
participants is the mass of supporting characters which both conflict
with and aid and support the three heroes as they go through their
quest.

Although this story is the standard story of unlikely people and
how they became heros, the interplay of the characters probably draws on
the author's own experiences with drunks, thieves and young headstong
people. I found the interactions interesting yet very predictable.

From the rating system, I would rate it at +0.5 from the -4 to +4
scale.

Capsule review: Disappointing and undoubtedly
fictionalized account of the twenty-fifth mission of the
first B-17 crew to reach that number and be sent home.
Eight real B-17s were used and they deserve billing above
the likes of Matthew Modine, Eric Stoltz, and John
Lithgow. Rating: low +1 (-4 to +4).

Undeniably there is some truth to this story. The Memphis Belle
really was the first B-17 Flying Fortress to complete twenty-five
missions and hence win its flight crew an opportunity to go home and sit
out the rest of the war in celebrity and with relatively cushy
assignments. Hence there really was a twenty-fifth mission of the
Memphis Belle. Whether the first twenty-four missions were as routine
as suggested in the film and the twenty-fifth was as dangerous ... that
I am somewhat skeptical about. I take most of the film with more than
one grain of salt. The drama is pat; the characters are stereotypes.
In fact, the script candidly tells you that the characters are going to
be stereotypes. "There's always one guy who's very religious, always
one guy from Cleveland," we are told in the first scene. So of course
we have these cliched characters here. This is _n_o_t _T_w_e_l_v_e _O'_C_l_o_c_k _H_i_g_h
and it is not one of the great adventure films about World War II. It
is, however, a very nice film to look at. The music and the decoration
have a nice feel of 1943, even if one can argue that the party is a bit
lavish for a humble air base. But the real visual splendor is in seeing
genuine B-17s taking off and flying together. I think most people get
some sort of a charge out of seeing airplanes flying and there is a lot
of flying in this film.

Basically Memphis Belle details for the viewer several of the more
common hazards of bombing runs over Germany. You see air battles; you
see near-misses, light collisions, and heavy collisions. You see flying
through a shower of flak. You see people getting shot up and mid-air
surgery. Mostly you see a lot of scenes you have seen in other films.
Yet somehow the film falls short of actually generating real excitement
or tension. We know the Belle is going to get back and the characters
are not real enough and certainly not endearing enough for us really to
worry about their individual safety. The film has a few too many
contrived touches even to have a feel of authenticity. It has fliers
mistaking tomato soup for blood. It has a dog who recognizes the sound
of his master's plane engines. Touches like these get in the way of the
audience taking the story very seriously.

This is a pretty film to watch but both too shallow in its drama
and too unexceptional in its action really to engage an audience. I
give it a low +1 on the -4 to +4 scale.

Capsule review: Anais Nin's affair with Henry
Miller as recounted in her diary may well be pretentious
enough to have pleased her. This is a film with a lot of
sex and very little eroticism as Nin demurely and
sensitively has sex with anyone who will stand still and
then describes it in perfumed prose in her diaries.
Rating: -1 (-4 to +4).

Take these comments with a grain of salt. Films about people's sex
and love lives somehow just do not appeal to me, even from excellent
filmmakers such as Woody Allen or Philip Kaufman. I rate them much
lower than other people seem to. Not that sex itself cannot be
interesting, but even a Woody Allen agonizing over why he cannot bed
Diane Keaton is for me the formula for a total yawner. Philip Kaufman's
last film, _T_h_e _U_n_b_e_a_r_a_b_l_e _L_i_g_h_t_n_e_s_s _o_f _B_e_i_n_g, while much in this genre,
did have enough substance besides the sexual maneuvering that it held my
interest. His current _H_e_n_r_y _a_n_d _J_u_n_e is a long film, but not nearly as
long as it seems. In spite of the title, the film is mostly about Anais
Nin and her early 1930s affair with Henry Miller. The film is based on
the account in her memoir of the same title. She makes herself out to
be small and in some ways strong, but in most ways she is fragile. She
is not entirely satisfied by her banker husband Hugo and is attracted to
virile American writer Henry Miller. Awakened by his presence, she
proceeds in her frail, sensitive way to have sex with everyone in reach
but the housemaid and perhaps the dog (though the dog wasn't talking).
She also has a stimulating intellectual relationship with Miller, who is
straight-laced enough to limit his sexual partners to only the members
of the opposite sex within reach. When one of them is not making love,
he or she is agonizing, writing books, or riding bicycles.

Most of the story is told in Nin's voice, which is an acquired
taste like candied violets. The camera adopts a soft focus to mirror
her writing style. One set, apparently near the house where much of the
action happens, is a long walkway next to a wall in night and fog. It
looks very much like an impressionist painting. I was hoping we would
see it in the daytime or at least without fog, but we never do. I
remember no other fog in the film and it is there apparently mostly for
effect.

Kaufman underscores that most of what we are seeing is from Nin's
point of view by having one sequence be a flashback narrated by Miller.
The soft focus is banished and the prose changes to a hard-boiled
Raymond Chandler style. Even in Nin's style Fred War may be trying to
affect Miller's character but it comes out like Humphrey Bogart. Maria
de Medeiros' Nin is a dictionary illustration for "demure" and often

Henry & June November 12, 1990 Page 2

also for "naked." Kaufman has created a tremendous number of nude
positions for couples in which the parts that would be most busy are out
of sight, perhaps trying for an R rating, or perhaps affecting Anais
Nin's point of view. (Of course, the film got first an X rating and
then inaugurated the NC-17 rating.) "June" refers, incidentally, to
Miller's wife, played by Uma Thurman, who usually is not around.

The film is constantly melodramatic, with deep people feeling deep
emotions which we are told about cheaply and superficially. You know
you're in trouble when characters start voicing lines like, "Does she
think she can love anything in you I haven't loved?" Even if these are
real people, these people aren't real. My rating: -1 on the -4 to +4
scale. It might have been lower but for the peculiar background created
of Paris in the 1930s.