You know what they say: "Life is like a box of chocolates ... you'll always hope you're never allergic."

I kid, I kid, but the sentiments are the same, I suppose.  We never know where life will lead us when the opportunity presents itself.  Many of us work very hard to make our dreams a reality, while others are still playing the "hoping and praying" game that somehow the Grand Master Of Fate will deliver something worthwhile or, at the very least, something different than what's already available.

Whatever the case, doors were meant to be opened -- caution be damned -- and that looks to be the exploration behind a little something something called Doors (2021).  From what I've read, this release is available for streaming effective today, and it'll be released on home video in a week or two.  Nothing unusual about that: those streaming platforms get first dibs on a lot of properties these days, thus making them a competitive choice for viewers who want to remain on the cutting edge of entertainment.

Here's the plot summary as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:

"Without warning, millions of mysterious alien 'doors' suddenly appear around the globe. In a rush to determine the reason for their arrival, mankind must work together to understand the purpose of these cosmic anomalies. Bizarre incidences occurring around the sentient doors leads humanity to question their own existence and an altered reality as they attempt to enter them."

And that's all I really know about that.

I did some cursory Googling around the web, and it looks like a handful of smilers have seen this one (not sure how, maybe a festival screening or the like); reviews have not bee very kind, but that's not uncommon for these smaller releases.  Lots of viewers stumble into damn near anything thinking that they're on-the-brink of discovering the next James Cameron lovefest, but rest assured those releases are few and hard-to-find.

Still, I'm gonna do like I do and post the coming attraction below.  Those interested can check it out for your own peace of mind.
​

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ

You know, I could be wrong, but I think Ridley Scott's Alien (1979) may very well have been the first R-rated motion picture I snuck into theatres to see.

 I say this primarily because I distinctly remember seeing the film up on the silver screen, but for the life of me I can't recall who in the name of Sam Hill in my circle of family and friends would've taken me to it.  That circle wasn't so big that I could honestly count on someone sneaking me inside, and given my lifelong passion for All Things Science Fiction I damn near had to see this one when it came out theatrically.  Do kids still do that these days?  Sneak into R-rated pictures?

Oh, well.

Yaphet Kotto was the one crewmember I honestly thought could've gone up against the Xenomorph and maybe -- maybe -- had a legitimate chance of survival.  It wasn't because he was the biggest and maybe even portrayed as the baddest in the feature, but it was because of this whole spacefaring group he was the only one who appeared legitimately blue collar.  Back in the day, I had a strong blue collar background (I was raised in a small factory town in the midwest), and we were kinda/sorta brought up to believe in blue collar workers.  So, yeah, I rooted for the guy.  And I suspect he went down swinging.

Sadly, the award-winning actor left us recently, and I felt it appropriate to acknowledge his passing.

He definitely gave us some professional appearances worthy of a second look.  His resume tops out at an impressive 95 different screen credits.  His early roles had a healthy exposure in television work, but the mid-to-late 1970's shows a change to more motion picture parts, many of them in conventional fare.  I loved him in Midnight Run (1988).  I also recall him turning up in a small role aboard SeaQuest DSV.  I have read that he was one of the actors considered for the part of Jean-Luc Picard aboard Star Trek: The Next Generation, but that's all I recall about that.

Prayers and salutations to his family.

​-- EZ

For those of you who do not know, Science Fictions films of the 1970’s tended to be rather gloomy.  1971’s The Andromeda Strain pitted Earth’s very survival against an alien plague in the hands of a few scientists, and they nearly lost.  1973’s Soylent Green featured a hardened detective uncovering the truth about what food source was keeping mankind alive, and it was mankind itself!  1976’s Logan’s Run explored a dark tomorrow wherein ordinary people in the prime of their lives were “executed” at age thirty in order to “reincarnate” into a better one.  Even 1979’s Alien matched the crew of a commercial starship against a space creature perfectly designed as the ultimate human nightmare.

Trust me when I saw that there are many, many more films whose themes leaned heartily toward the negative than the positive.  Many who’ve studied that decade concluded that, culturally, storytellers were coming off two decades of news headlines exploring the dark side of human nature.  Atomic energy led many to believe our civilization was going to destroy itself, and the Cold War certainly exacerbated that possible outcome.  President Kennedy was assassinated, and the same fate befell Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King.  The Vietnam War waged on nightly television.  Reality intruded on our escapism, and these films reflected those harsh themes.

But as happens eventually, the pendulum swung back; and the films of the 1980’s gradually returned audiences to the cinematic distractions they so dearly craved, most of which was driven by the big studio successes stemming from George Lucas and Steven Spielberg.  1982’s Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan returned Starfleet’s heroes of tomorrow into top form as Captain James T. Kirk squared off successfully against a sworn enemy.  1984’s Ghostbusters delivered a quartet of bumbling ghost hunters saving New York City from the forces of supernatural evil.  And 1985’s Back To The Future sent young Marty McFly on a journey back in time to save his future and the life of his best friend.

In sharp contrast to the films of the 70’s, these 80’s motion pictures had an earnestness – a wholesomeness – at their core; and it was that very wholesomeness that drove these various characters to, eventually, do the right thing.  In fact, no film better exemplified this narrative foundation than Steven Spielberg’s 1982 Fantasy E.T. – The Extraterrestrial.  In E.T., an alien botanist ends up being left behind when his spacecraft leaves Earth to avoid discovery; and this space being – unlike the one at the center of Ridley Scott’s Alien – is a threat to no one.  To survive, E.T. will need the help of some suburban youngsters – and their mother struggling with newfound singlehood – if he’s to contact his ship, escape possible government dissection, and win the hearts and minds of audiences worldwide.

I was there in 1982 when E.T. premiered; and – like so many – I was totally enamored of the film.  Arguably, it was one of the purest experiences of falling in love at first sight with a movie I had ever experienced.  But if you had told me that four decades later I would fall in love with a film that was perhaps the exact antithesis of E.T. yet still somehow managed to capture that same ‘warm fuzzy’ result, I would’ve told you it was impossible.  Still, here we are.  I’m four decades older.  And I’m about to tell you why PG: Psycho Goreman is the perfect alternative to E.T.
​

(Note: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for my final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)

From the promotional materials: “Siblings Mimi and Luke unwittingly resurrect an ancient alien overlord who was entombed on Earth millions of years ago after a failed attempt to destroy the universe.  They nickname the evil creature Psycho Goreman (or PG for short) and use the magical amulet they discovered to force him to obey their childish whims.  It isn’t long before PG’s reappearance draws the attention of intergalactic friends and foes from across the cosmos and a rogues’ gallery of alien combatants converges in small-town suburbia to battle for the fate of the galaxy.”

Whether you agree with the premise or not, one of the chief reasons that films fail to establish an audience during their initial theatrical release is that advertising departments do not know how to market them.  This truism applies especially to Science Fiction and Fantasy films, and it’s practically inescapable if the SciFi/Fantasy film mixes humor with the storytelling.  The textbook example for this that’s often cited by film aficionados is 1990’s Ron Underwood-directed Tremors, a feature no marketing executive knew how to quantify much less promote in any 90-second trailer.  The $11 million dollar film barely took back its production costs and kinda/sorta came-and-went from the box office in a hurry.
​
However, Tremors premiered on VHS during the home video craze of the early 1990’s; and it practically exploded.  Rentals went through the roof, and retailers couldn’t carry enough copies on the shelves to satiate the audience’s demand for it.  In fact, Universal Pictures realized quickly that they now had something special on their hands; and they tapped storytellers to expand the Tremors universe.  To date, that “failed first film” spawned six sequels as well as a short-lived television series; and that’s not too bad for a missed opportunity, is it?

If there is any justice in this cold, cold universe at all, then PG: Psycho Goreman will suffer the same “failure” … meaning I’d be thrilled to see more of this universe.
​

Writer/director Steven Kostanski has taken everything element from E.T. and flipped it on its head.  Those wholesome suburban kids?  Well, they’re not so wholesome anymore, with Mimi and Luke properly wasting away their youth on homemade games of ‘Crazy Ball.’  (Tip: don’t try to follow the rules.)  Luke’s punishment for losing the game is to dig a hole big enough to bury a moose (it’s supposed to be his grave), and this is where the kids unearth the evil alien.  Those loving parents?  Well, Susan and Greg are together – if that’s all a marriage is – and they occasionally appear to be concerned about the welfare of their offspring, even occasionally appear to love one another, but it’d be a happier home if Greg could get his head on straight and get up off the couch from time-to-time.  Those mortal adversaries?  Well, the government’s nowhere in sight, and the local law officers who come up against PG and the kids don’t fare so well.

Thankfully, Psycho isn’t a big budget extravaganza.  If it were, I suspect much of this wouldn’t work.  Many of the effects squeezed into its 94-minute running time are practical effects; and they work very well alongside the inspired zaniness of what services as a story here.  It’s the low budget appeal of the traditional B-Movie that fuels so much of Psycho – aptly named, I might add – and the audiences who love this stuff are willing to suspend disbelief with a second-rate effect here or there because it all adds to the mirth.  It’s escapism for escapism’s sake, delivered with buckets of blood.

Still, I’d be remiss if I didn’t heap some praise on to Psycho’s on-screen talent because they’re the secret sauce to making all of this work as well as it does.  Some of the gimmicks even require the young and old in front of the camera to sell this schtick, and Kostanski’s players all hit their marks admirably.  Nita-Josee Hanna is pitch perfect as the piss-and-vinegar fueled ‘Mimi’ as is Owen Myre as her less-disturbed brother ‘Luke,’ and their brother/sister camaraderie feels authentic even through the giddiest moment.  Steven Vlahos voices PG wonderfully while Matthew Ninaber brings pure menace to the overlord’s physical form.  The film is rich with supporting players who, thankfully, are all in on the Kostanski’s joke, and they deliver their respective big and small moments with ease.

Psycho Goreman is at its absolute best when it’s with the young-at-heart, for that’s truly who take to this sort of comic lunacy.  In the big finish, Mimi experiences her coming of age moment – as does Luke – the way kids do in classic Spielbergian fashion … but dare I say Mr. Spielberg would not approve of how they handle it?  Spielberg would have them save the Earth, but Kostanski sticks with the punch line he started with in the beginning … we’re all doomed.  After all, E.T. wasn’t hell bent on eating the children for revenge ... was he?

PG: Psycho Goreman is produced by Dystopia Films and Raven Banner Entertainment.  DVD distribution is being handled via RLJE Films.  As for the technical specifications, the picture is very well made, though there were a few instances were sound quality dipped a bit for a second or two.  Those of you who relish in special features have plenty to look forward to as the disc comes with a director commentary, a handful of talent interviews, and some very solid making-of extras.  It’s a spectacular package.

Highly recommended.  The best way to approach PG: Psycho Goreman is to know that no one involved likely took any of it seriously, and you shouldn’t either.  It’s funny.  You’re meant to laugh at it.  At all of it.  If you’ve seen Netflix’s Stranger Things, then mix in some of the irreverence of Comedy Central’s South Park, and you get the idea.  Life is better when you laugh at it, and I found plenty to laugh at in its 94 blood-soaked minutes.
​
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at RLJE Entertainment provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of PG: Psycho Goreman by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

Pardon me if you've heard this rant.

Over the past two days, I've been inundated with press accounts from a variety of outlets regarding this potential "new Star Trek" project from long-time Trek contributor Nicholas Meyer, the filmmaking genius who contributed to the best films from the original crew.  For the uninformed, this largely involves Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, and Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.  These so-called new reports discusses the fact that Meyer has recently pitched a new project to Paramount for a Trek film, maybe a Trek series, or maybe a bit of both that would blend together.  These articles handle this as though Meyer's possible involvement is an all-new development ... but the truth in that respect couldn't be further from the reality.

All one has to do is google Meyer's past offerings with Paramount, and you'll find that he's been active in several notices over the past decade if not longer.  I've read articles that linked him to efforts to resusitate Star Trek after TV's Star Trek: Enterprise demise.  There are articles out there linking him to efforts during the debacle that was the JJ Abrams' incarnation of Trek.  And, yes, you can do just a little bit of leg work and find that Meyer's name was dropped regarding the development of programming for said Trek on their not-all-that-old subscriber streaming service.  So Meyer's ideas for Star Trek are far from new ... so why is this being dribbled in the press yet again?

Call me cynical, if you will, but I can't help but wonder if this reportage is little more than Paramount's press campaign to try to woo old Treksters like myself back to the franchise.

Paramount doesn't really want to discuss streaming Star Trek successes or failures in any practical means.  Star Trek: Discovery hasn't exactly been the bombshell that I suspect executives believed it would be; and (ahem) Star Trek: Lower Decks certainly didn't bring fans clamoring for more as its animated sensibilities would probably attract more viewers from Cartoon Network than it would Trek purists.  Star Trek: Picard -- in my opinion -- was hot garbage that tried to trample over a franchise's legacy in favor of delivering blue ink (aka curse words) to a franchise that was at one time invested in big ideas.  Sadly, what many of us knew as being Trek died a long time ago, but that won't stop Paramount from slapping the label on something new and different for the sake of being new and different.

So ... how do you bring back some of those tried-and-true Trek enthusiasts?

Why, you drop the name of someone who has some street cred, and you hope for the best, of course!

Yes, I like my Star Trek being allegorical and relevant.  What Paramount is dishing out today is best served cold as its creative staff appears enamored with cancel culture and the ever-expanding LGBT movement.  I'm not saying that there aren't stories to be told from those corners of existence; to the contrary, there are ... I just wish we had relatable characters telling them.  STD's crew?  Meh.  In the eyes of the current writing staff, I suspect they can't figure out how Starfleet made it as far as it did without the guidance of Michael Burnham.

Notice the name: Burnham.

Burn ... as in insult.

Ham ... as in 'hammy' acting.  Think William Shatner.

The character's name is an insult hurled back at classic Trek.

That's the level of intelligent discourse these writers offer any viewership.

So, yes, I wouldn't put it past some Paramount suit to try to confuse the disaffected amongst us to think that the next project to roll down the pike (pun intended) might just be something from Nicholas Meyer.

They're just that stupid.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ

Like so many folks, I love getting a pleasant surprise ... and the biggest of this past week was the complimentary Blu-ray of Psycho Goreman I received in the mail from a favorite distributor I shuck films for occasionally.

For those unaware, Psycho Goreman is one of the smaller films that made the rounds fairly recently in theaters, but largely due to the pandemic I don't think many folks have seen it.  Well, that can change next week, as it's getting released on home video this upcoming March 16, and it looks like it has an incredible assortment of extras (for folks who like that sort of thing).

I've watched it.  And I'm planning on watching it again.  I'll probably watch the commentary this weekend.  I'll have a review up next week, but the straight skinny?  I love it.  It's a helluva lot of fun.

Now, what I find funny and what you find funny are probably different things; so be warned that the humor might not work as well for you as it did for me.  But I loved it.  Seriously.  It's the best B-Movie I've seen in a long time.

Trailer is below.  Release details will follow under that.
​

C'mon, Americans!  Are we gonna let those dreaded Russkies beat the living tar out of us in the only real Space Race that matters?!

Well, as Fate would have it, it looks like we're a distant second place as rapid Star Wars Mandalorian fanatic Ayaal Fedorov spent the better part of his year-long COVID lockdown completing construction on a life-sized version of the Razor's Crest, the famed ship featured prominently in the Walt Disney streaming property, The Mandalorian.  According to Fedorov's specifications, his version of the ship measures 46 feet long, 13 feet high, and weighs over one ton.

That, my friends, is quite the fan.  And that, my friends, is also a tourist attraction.

Interested in knowing more?  Well, there isn't all that much I can find, but here's the link that made me first aware of the project.  Had I the room in the backyard?  Maybe I'd ask the wife.  This is the way, you know.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ

Am I a bad person because I don't like awards shows?

Honestly, folks, I used to like them.  Granted, that was probably twenty or so years ago ... but at some point everything became so politicized that I turned much of society out for my own sanity's sake.  Don't get me wrong: I'm fairly political personally, but it's just that I do try to separate as much as humanly possible my politics from my entertainment.  If I want to watch something politically driven, then I can turn on any news channel.  Is it too much to ask that my escapism be truly escapist?

Of course, of course: I'm smart enough to realize that on one level all fiction -- especially Science Fiction -- is political to an extent.  You can't write about the future, the possibility of strange new worlds and new civilizations, and not in some way reflect upon where we are culturally.  This is what drives a lot of authors to explore the worlds they create, and more power to them.  It's just that -- as I said -- I'd rather be swept off to places I've never been and never seen without pointing fingers back at all of the drama we might leave behind here on Earth.

But I digress ...

The whole point of this post is merely to educate my audience to the fact that the 56th Annual Nebula Awards are scheduled for March 15th; and -- from what I'm reading -- the awards ceremony will be broadcast live online.  Those interested in more of the finer points of the occasion can simply follow this link, as there's a bit more you might wish to know beforehand.  Though I won't be watching, I encourage you to do so.  I'll try to have up an announcement next week regarding the winners as that's more in my wheelhouse than anything else.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

One of the hardest tasks in maintaining SciFiHistory.Net is, sadly, having to note the passing of time along with the passing of some we've come to know -- even in small ways -- on this great journey that's called "life."  Each and every time I'm reminded -- much like Star Trek's Jean-Luc Picard said in the movie Star Trek: Generations that there are fewer years ahead of me than behind -- that all of this is fleeting.  In the end, these small moments perhaps don't matter much, unless we've spent a fair amount of effort commemorating the stops along the way.

I'm not Stargate's biggest advocate.  I've mentioned before that I just quite didn't 'get' into the show during its run on premium cable and the SciFi Channel (now Syfy).  I caught episodes from time-to-time; but it was honestly only just earlier this year that I binged my way through all of Season One.  There were some small gems in there.  I've always enjoyed good characters, but I struggle with stories that are either too routine or too overcooked ... and I found much of SG-1 a bit thin on the bones.  Still, I'll persevere as time permits and continue the journey.

Alas, the beloved franchise has lost another: Cliff Simon.  With twenty-six professional credits to his name, the SciFi saga was definitely one of his biggest accomplishments in genre, with appearances in fifteen episodes as well as the Stargate: Continuum telefilm.  Fans have flocked to the Information Superhighway with stories of their memories with him, so much so that it's clear that the actor was dear to Stargate fandom.

As I always point out, we'll always have the time on flickering images to remember him by.  Make sure to wish the man godspeed when you can today.

​-- EZ