Faithful readers, hear me out: I have to admit that -- as of today's date in history -- I've never seen Luigi Cozzi's incarnation of Hercules.

HEAR ME OUT!  HEAR ME OUT!

It was 1983, and I was growing up in a small, small, small town; and the film never made it to our local theater.  Not all that later in life, I'd heard from a few folks -- the kind whose opinions of flicks I trusted very, very much -- and they assured me that it was a feature which deserved to be avoided under penalty of death.  So for those and any other number of lesser reasons I just never sought it out ... and I really can't explain why today all of these years later I haven't given it a fair shot.  I realize that the general concensus of "educated opinion" on it is that it's cinematic fodder ... but to those folks I suggest that maybe you truly haven't seen enough really, really, really, really, really bad pictures to know the difference.

If you've read enough of what I've written from the heart about films in this space, then you'll likely know that I just don't truly hate any picture.  I might hate parts of them.  I might hate some performances, or I might loathe some bad special effects or poor production quality.  But overall I think -- if you look hard enough -- there's always something of value hidden in there.  Some nugget of gold.  It might be an idea.  It might be an actor or actress.  Hell, it might even be some snippet of dialogue, for all it matters, but there's something there.  I've kinda/sorta trained my brain to latch on to some element in that way, and I suppose that's what keeps me sane from seeing so damn many films in my life.

In any event ...

As I said, this one was directed by the great Luigi Cozzi, and the auteur also claims credit for the script as well.  As for the talent, Mr. Cozzi brought together an ensemble like no other.  Lou Ferrigno.  Brad Harris.  Rossana Podestà.  Sybil Danning.  It's quite the round-up, and one should expect no less coming as this did from the great team of Golan-Globus.

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

"King Minos and sorceress Adriana plan to conquer the world with her magic and his giant robots. To make matters worse, they also plan to sacrifice Hercules' love interest Cassiopeia. Hercules teams up with sorceress Circe and tries to save both his girl and the world."

Great mother of dragons ... have you seen Sybil Danning?  My goodness, that woman is a picture of loveliness.  Acting?  Meh.  But if you wanted a name actress in the 1980's for any Fantasy-themed property, she had to be at the top of the list if not the only damn name on it.

And Ferrigno?  As Hercules?  I realize that the guy's signature claim to fame has been and will likely always be his appearance in the fondly remembered TV incarnation of The Incredible Hulk -- still one of the greatest genre shows in the whole history of television.  No one could argue that he didn't look the part of the immortal hero from mythology, and he had the chops to prove he could stand toe-to-toe alongside any villain.

Well, I do see that the flick is coming up on its 40th anniversary next year ... so I'm gonna make readers this promise: by this time in 2023 -- so long as we don't all go under in the global Apocalypse or I pass into the hereafter -- I give you my word that I will not only have seen Hercules but also I'll have penned a review of it on SciFiHistory.Net's MainPage.  Somehow.  Sometime.  Some way.  I'll make it happen.

In the meantime, sing a chorus of Happy Birthday to the original Hulk.

​-- EZ

Full disclosure, folks: I don’t read nearly as much as I used to.
 
Now, that isn’t because I loathe reading because nothing could be further from the truth.  While I wasn’t much of a fan back in my school days, I discovered a broader love for books of all types – Science Fiction, Fantasy, and fact-based stuff as well – in the mid-1980’s.  Through a good portion of the 1990’s, in fact, I made it a personal goal to read at least two books a month but averaged closer to four.  The reason I just don’t do it all that much these days is maintaining ‘the world’s greatest SciFi and Fantasy blog ever’ (my term, not yours) requires an awful lot of time and attention.  Something had to give, and reading was it.
 
Still, every now and then, a little something something comes to me by request over the vast Information Superhighway that is the World Wide Web.  If it sounds interesting enough, then I’ll take a gander.  And author Dana Hammer’s request – a forthcoming tome curiously titled The Cannibal’s Guide To Fasting – really piqued my interest.  She promised the Apocalypse and Horror – two things that go hand-in-hand ‘round these parts – along with a healthy dose of Humor.  Throw in the SciFi angle along with some hints of Zombies and cannibalism … and I ask you: “What’s not to love?”
 
In all seriousness, I couldn’t pass it up.  We connected online, and she forwarded me a copy for review purposes.  I’m glad she did, even at the risk of me biting off a bit more than I could chew … (snicker snicker)
 
(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 book’s Amazon.com citation (though edited for length):
“Igor Fenenko, a former research scientist, is a scary, scary man. Not only is he a massive bodybuilder with a spider tattooed on his face, he has also been infected with Pestis Manducans – a viral cannibalism.  Caught, disgraced, and sent to a ‘rehabilitation center,’ Igor is now forced to live in a government-mandated Containment Center.  Igor’s brother, Karl, is also infested with Pestis.  He lives down by the river, where he runs a cannibal rights group.  But when Igor discovers their evil practices, he is forced to intervene.  Aided and opposed by rich eccentrics who have their own agendas, Igor must use brains and muscles to find a cure while fighting the urge to turn brains and muscles into a delicious lunch.”
 
Anyone whose read much of what I’ve written over the years about Comedy in genre projects knows my particular stance on the topic: Comedy combined with anything – SciFi, Horror, Thrillers, etc. – is an exceedingly risky proposition.  This isn’t because those subjects are not funny or the writer (or filmmaker) isn’t gifted at slinging jokes.  Rather, what each individual viewer or reader finds funny varies widely, so I’m always urging caution when dabbling with such a mix.  Occasionally, it’s done well, but far too often the humor doesn’t feel organic to the situation and characters; this produces the effect of slowing down the narrative (when the opposite is expected), and the meal is ruined.  Just ruined.
 
Thankfully, that’s not the case with The Cannibal’s Guide To Fasting … and that’s largely because author Hammer rather smartly doesn’t revel in any of the ensuing hilarity.  Her book moves with relative briskness (just over 250 pages), allowing her chief instigator – Igor Fenenko – the observational blurb here and there.  The humor here isn’t the construct – there are no passages built around a punch line nor any soliloquy’s leading to some big laugh moment.  Instead, what’s funny is often tied directly to the narration (the author’s voice) and the assembly of sometimes quirky characters who surround the tale’s hero.  As such, that’s a very good choice because the novel works well on that level.
 
But …
 
… even stronger is the world-building that Hammer builds into these pages.  There’s an effortlessness to the prose I didn’t expect, especially given the potential scope that’s outlined in the full synopsis (found at Amazon.com, in case you missed it).
 
Let me explain:
 
I typically avoid Fantasy novels because I find some of these reading absolutely exhausting with how much time a particular writer wants to spend in fleshing out each and every corner of the world itself.  While I appreciate any readership that clings to every idea – every kingdom, every city, every borough, every street address, the color each character wears, etc. – I’ve always personally found those things plodding.  Because I’ve always felt more inspired by a simple central story populated with smart and recognizable characters, I steer clear of things I believe are “getting into the weeds.”  I hate weeds.  I hate ‘em.
 
With Fasting, however, Hammer has a unique ability to give me just enough in each crafted moment to grasp what’s necessary for me to achieve and understanding … and then she’s back into the story.  While there are the obligatory author’s ‘time-outs’ here and there – every writer wants and uses a chance to bring folks alive on the page – she avoids the “Read this, I’m writing here” sensibility that many other established voices tend to fall back on.  Consequently, I felt like I was being encouraged to keep with Igor’s journey instead of falling into cracks exploring too deeply ideas of government and class and morality; those things are there, but they’re subservient to the plot and not vice versa.
 
Still, Fasting had a few shortcomings for me.
 
I never quite bought into these two brothers’ evolving adversarial relationship.  Without spoiling some of the finer details (which I never do), it’s clear to me that Igor played the role of ‘brotherly protector’ in more ways than one in their past, so I struggled in accepting the full gamut of where and how the book ends.  Some of this, I think, is also owed to brother Karl’s unstated characterization: as the physically and emotionally weaker of the two boys (from their youth), where exactly did this ‘high and mighty’ opinion of himself later in life come from?  I don’t doubt that Hammer can answer these questions; my point is only that I can’t answer them easily on my own (without making a few guesses based on my own experience), and that weakens the ride.  (Doesn’t destroy it; just weakens it.)
 
There are also a few small(ish) details – things about how gold coins are handled, how government and non-government agencies act, and whatnot – that pulled me out of the world here and there to minor degrees.  These aren’t so much errors as they are, perhaps, differences of knowledge?  Or opinion?  For example, my understanding of antiquities – especially gold – is predicated on my few years of working in the banking industry; because a transaction in the book happens far easier than it would in reality – especially in this day and age – I get distracted by those events.  True, these differences can always be tempered by saying, “Hey, this is the future, so the rules are different,” and that’s why I never make big deals out of them, only mention them in passing.
 
But Igor Fenenko certainly stays front-and-center in the engaging adventure.  Sometimes bloody – but always pulpy, if you get my drift – his is a hard act to follow.
 
The Cannibal’s Guide To Fasting (2022) was written by Dana Hammer.  The book is being published by Cinnabar Moth Publishing LLC, and it is scheduled to ‘street’ on September 6th.  Amazon.com shows hardcover price at $31.99 and digital (Kindle) at $4.99.
 
Recommended.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the author and Book Sirens provided me with an advance reader copy of The Cannibal’s Guide To Fasting 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.

-- EZ

As tends to happen these days more and more, this one just snuck right up on me: I've never heard a single word about Wifelike, a little something something that appears ready to hit the masses-at-large via a limited theatrical run as well as streaming digitally on August 12th.  The trailer is up on YouTube.com (link) for those who want to go and check it out.

So far as I'm concerned, you really can't go wrong with a drama involving synthetics.  There have been so many good ones, and I've even found some positive attributes I can assign to the weaker entries as well.  For me, these flicks are almost as reliable as Horror fans find zombie pictures: there's always a market for one more story set within those confines, and even the cheap imitators have something to offer.

I did a quick scan of the Information Superhighway, and it does look like this one has been screening in advance for critics (typically a good sign).  While I've only read two reviews, the verdict looks promising, though this one might not have the level of special effects and visual spectacle most audiences expect from Science Fiction and Fantasy releases these days.  While I find that stuff a bit too overwhelming at times, I do realize you folks tend to disagree with me on that front.  To each his own ...

In any event, this motion picture was hatched from James Bird.  He wrote and directed it for SP Media Group.  I've reached out to them via their website but not yet heard back.  If I can get access to a screener, this is exactly the kind of thing I'd love to review.  (Keep your fingers crossed.)  It stars Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Elena Kampouris, Doron Bell, and Agam Darshi.  Here's the film's plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:

"When artificial human Meredith is assigned as a companion to grieving widower William, she is designed to behave like his late wife. But in the fight to end AI exploitation, an organization attempts to sabotage her programming."

The trailer and synopsis don't give away too much information.  It looks like the idea is inspired (perhaps in some small way) by the SciFi classic The Stepford Wives (1975), but there's more of a mystery involving this synthetic, it would seem.  It very well might be a plotline similar to what TV viewers were treated to in the first season of Humans (an AMC/BBC joint production), a program I think is one of the best of its type in recent times.

Whatever the case, I'll keep plugging away to see if I can screen this one for review purposes.  Naturally, I'll let you know should I find anything positive from it.

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

​-- EZ

Confession time, folks: yes, I'm one of them.

You've heard of us.  We're almost mythical.  We're very hard to find.  You can't exactly spot us quickly in a crowd, and you'd most likely fail if you were trying to pick us out in a line-up.  But I thought today would be the perfect day to come clean with all of you.

Yes: I'm one of the very few who watched the original Star Wars: The Clone Wars movie in the theater.

And ... I loved it.

Truth be told, I didn't love all of it.  The introduction of Ahsoka Tano was more than a bit clumsy, as was the whole logic behind giving a Padawan to a Padawan (that was the subject of some controversy online at the time.  It was a small point -- so far as this viewer is concerned -- but given that it came down with approval from the Jedi Master himself (aka George Lucas) who was I to authentically debate the issue?  If it was good enough for George, then it was good enough for me.

Though I'm quite fond of the Prequel Trilogy, I did agree with those who said it kinda/sorta missed the boat on having some of the kid-friendly fun atmosphere of the Original Trilogy, and that's part of why I think I embraced this movie so much: it clearly put Star Wars back in the minds and hearts of the youngest among us without resorting to JarJar level antics.  With The Clone Wars, Star Wars had found its way back to the place it occupied in my heart when I was 12 years old seeing it for the first time; and I was thrilled to have it back.

Here's the film's plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:

​"After the Republic's victory on Christophsis, Anakin and his new apprentice, Ahsoka Tano, must rescue the kidnapped son of Jabba the Hutt. Political intrigue complicates their mission."

Because the film received a bit of hate with its original release -- and precisely because the Clone Wars has gone on to be one of the property's highest regarded incarnations -- I think those who kinda/sorta trashed it at the time really ought to go back and look at it now, years later, and perhaps reconsider what made it a singularly unique vision added to that galaxy far, far away.  Sure -- as even I'll admit -- it had some problems and maybe upset the narrative apple cart in ways fandom hadn't anticipated, but it definitely paved the way for some incredible suspenseful storytelling as well as more than a few characters who've risen to the top of favorites in no small fashion.

I even dragged an old college buddy of mine to the theater to watch this one with me as the wife wasn't much interested.  However, once I introduced her to the subsequent television series, she's gone on to love this one as much as I do.

As always, thanks for reading ... and may the Force be with us!

​-- EZ

"Like the scene of a car crash I can't turn away from" is the best way to describe my continuing love affair with Roger Corman's Battle Beyond The Stars.

And I think right there is the issue: for all intents and purposes, when I saw this film at the drive-in back in 1980, it was the first time I can recall specifically going to a flick and watching it for the sole purpose of enjoying what I had read was about as great as any Roger Corman picture was going to be.  I was young; I had been reading the news and whatever entertainment magazines we had back in the day (which was slim pickings, my friends); and I had just kinda/sorta come into a wider appreciation of following specific filmmakers.  George Lucas had made an imprint, naturally, as did Steven Spielberg, but those of us hungry to really attach ourselves to the movers and shakers of the 1970's and 80's were limited.  Back in those days, it was far more common for screenwriters and directors to bounce from project to project -- from genre to genre -- so it was difficult to find folks we could sink our teeth into, study their stylistic predilections, and learn something from these repeat efforts.  Corman was a known commodity, and that put him in a league with the purveyors of Star Wars, Close Encounters, and the like.

So, yes, I'm fully aware of all of Battle's blemishes.  Hell, I probably even know a few more than most do 'cause I've spent time picking apart elements of this flick in an attempt to discover why it 'ticks' the way it does with me.  I can't say why specifically ... other than Corman's name being so closely aligned with it.  That and the fact that -- you have to admit -- the film has a whole lot of interesting ideas chocked in it compliments of yarnspinners Anne Dyer and John Sayles.  The film -- flawed though it may be -- has a fabulous undercurrent that few can deny.

Directed by Jimmy T. Murakami, the film boasts a fabulous assortment of names and relative unknowns from the era.  Richard Thomas -- who had build a career around playing 'John Boy' on TV's family-centric The Waltons -- brought that same rural vibe to this project as young 'Shad,' a farmer on a quest to free his people from tyranny.  And ... can I say these three names without getting goosebumps?  Robert Vaughn, John Saxon, and George freaking Peppard in the same motion picture?!?!  That's some big name and B-Movie magic right there.  Top is off with Sybil Danning at the top of her game -- along with Darlanne Fluegel and the fetching Julia Duffy in a small role -- what more could any fan want for a single film?

Here's the premise as provided by IMDB.com:

​"A young farmer sets out to recruit mercenaries to defend his peaceful planet, which is under threat of invasion by the evil tyrant Sador and his armada of aggressors."

I know, I know, I know.  But this is a case wherein all I can say is, "So sue me!"

I do recall -- back in the days when message board debates were all the rage -- really getting into a keyboard throwdown with a few blokes over whether Battle was the kind of film we should be endorsing as fans of Science Fiction and Fantasy.  I won't trouble you with the bulk of their points -- honestly, a lot of their posturing was just downright silly if you ask me given the fact that Battle itself is more than silly in spots.  It all boiled down to the fact that they thought Corman's films -- in particular -- capitalized on the campiness of intellectual properties and ended up giving fandom a bad name.

My reply was that anyone with any understanding of Science Fiction since its inception and expansion into film knows full well that camp -- like it or not -- has often been part and parcel of how these stories are presented and is, arguably, why they endure subsequent showings and are embraced by increasing generations of viewers.  Rocky Horror?  Beloved for its camp.  Barbarella?  Beloved for its camp.  Little Shop Of Horrors?  Same thing.

Why should Battle Beyond The Stars deserve no less?

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

​-- EZ

I know, I know, I know: you might be surprised to hear this, folks, but here's another one where I diverge with the majority thinking.

See, I recall watching the curiously-named The Adventures Of Buckaroo Banzai Across The 8th Dimension in theaters, and I distinctly remember being bored silly with it.  As is often the case with genre flicks, I loved the premise -- the whole idea of this band of adventurers headlined by a super-genius, super-scientist, super-rock-star -- and I was totally into the kinda/sorta whacked out possibilities of differing dimensions and the like.  But somehow I just thought the sum of the parts never quite equalled a whole.

I know, I know, I know.  "But how can you ...?  But why don't you ...?  But won't you just ...?"

What can I say?  It is what it is.

​Directed by W.D. Richter with a script from Earl Mac Rauch, the film boasts one of the most talented ensembles one could imagine for its day.  Peter Weller.  Jeff Goldblum.  John Lithgow.  Ellen Barkin (before she got all bitter with politics and was just one of the hottest actresses on the planet).  Christopher Lloyd.  Clancy Brown.  Those and a whole host of familiar faces.  Here's the plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:

"Adventurer, brain surgeon, rock musician Buckaroo Banzai and his crime-fighting team, the Hong Kong Cavaliers, must stop evil alien invaders from the eighth dimension who are planning to conquer Earth."

Heck, you know what?  I can even remember giving this one a second chance when it came out on home video, something I almost never do.  My sentiment at the time was maybe I'd seen it theatrically on a bad day or something, and -- given the strength of the idea and the line-up -- I'd watch it again and be entirely surprised.  Two hours later?  Nope.  Nothing.  No change.  In fact, I may've even had trouble staying awake through all of it that second time.  It just never stuck.  Can't say why.

Banzai is also famous for promising a sequel well before it had achieved any measure of legitimate box office success (that never came).  I believe someone shared with me recently that the sequel did see the light of day in book format (comic book? novel?), but -- my opinion of the original being what it is -- I've no compunction to see out and explore that.  God bless those of you with the stones to do it.  Maybe a follow-up could've been something special.

No, no, no.  Of course, I don't think less of anyone for enjoying its charms.  If you dig it, then you dig it.  Nothing more needs to be said about that.  It just failed to connect with me.  Such is the life of the occasional film fan.

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

​-- EZ

Ach.  As I've said all too often as of late, these posts really and truly hurt.  This one cuts particularly deep.

Full disclosure: I know I've mentioned 'round these parts before that I absolutely hate musicals, but there's one voice I just can't resist.  Olivia Newton-John has always had the voice of an angel -- so far as this red-blooded adult male is concerned -- and I can't tell you the number of times I've sat through Grease (1978) just to hear her sing.  Yes, I've even sat through the tepid cinematic Fantasy Xanadu (1980) once or twice (or maybe three times) just to appreciate her incredible pipes.  And I think the wifey and I had the good fortune of seeing her in concert either two or three times when she made it through our respective part of the country.  No one quite knew how to light up a room the way she did, and my heart is breaking over the announcement of her passing today.

Though I've not read deeply into the obituaries, I know that she's had a long struggle with cancer.  A few years back, I recall that she had to cancel her concert dates in and around the U.S. with the word that her cancer had returned; and I'm suspecting that perhaps this last bout was more than the lady could endure.

Because I'm a genre junkie like few other on the web today, I can tell you that she definitely dipped her toes into the realm of Science Fiction with a top starring role in a little something something called Toomorrow (1970) from Lowndes Productions Limited.  Though I've never seen this one, I've long been aware that it involved the lady's band being kidnapped by a group of dying aliens who found strength from the good vibrations of the pop band she headlined in the film; and I'll likely have to search that flick out now that the good lady has left us.

Thoughts and prayers to the family, frends, and fans of the lady.

​-- EZ

(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 product packaging:
“From the height of the Italian sci-fi craze comes Battle Of The Worlds, a creepy thriller about a runaway asteroid dubbed ‘The Outsider.’  Scientists are puzzled as it begins orbiting the Earth before intentions are made clear with an unleashed fleet of lethal flying saucers!”
 
Yes, yes, and yes: I’ve most definitely seen Battle Of The Worlds somewhere sometime in the TV days of my youth.
 
While others might have their very own reasons for remembering it – some goofy special effects, maybe some stiff acting here and there – I can tell you mine without hesitation: actor Claude Rains has a big part in it, and I’ve always thought he was one of his era’s finest character actors.  He was the original Invisible Man (1933); he was more than a bit angelic in Here Comes Mr. Jordan (1941); and he put a likeable face on what could’ve been a dark turn in filmdom’s highwater mark, Casablanca (1942).  So I can assure you that I’d seen this particular Battle, though I may not have had fully appreciated what director Antonio Margheriti accomplished with it when I was a young boy.
 
For those who don’t know the name, it could be for one of two reasons.  One: he was an Italian filmmaker – a bit of a second-tier one, at that – so it’s entirely possible his career may’ve passed you by.  Second: in the U.S. (and abroad, often times) he appeared in the credits under the name Anthony Dawson.  I’ve been told that there were several reasons why he went under a pseudonym, but the one most often cited is that ‘Dawson’ was a surname that audiences wouldn’t likely associate with Italian features, perhaps giving a more (ahem) international hint to his motion pictures.
​

Whatever the case may ultimately be, Margheriti crafted stories in a variety of genres, but I believe it’s his genre features which have more strongly stood the test of time.  Battle Of The Worlds was a vastly stronger SciFi picture than was his previous effort, Assignment: Outer Space (1960), a film that comes off a bit stoic if not downright dull.  1964’s Castle Of Blood is a well-regarded Horror that gave Barbara Steele (from 1960’s Italian masterpiece Black Sunday) another great entry in chills and thrills.  Then came Margheriti’s ‘Gamma One Quadrilogy:’ The Wild Wild Planet (1966), The War Of The Planets (1966), War Between The Planets (1966), and Snow Devils (1967) created a whole universe around the Gamma One Space Station, allowing the storyteller to maximize four different plots around a central setting and shared casts.
 
Although there are more films in the man’s resume (he was making pictures into the late 1990’s, including the 1983’s schlocky Yor: The Hunter From The Future), I’ll leave it there as I think these mentions crystalize where he was at this time in his career and demonstrate his affinity for Science Fiction in general.  Drawn to the realms of the fantastic, Margheriti was a pioneer in affordable filmmaking; and it’s easy to see why something like Ennio Di Concini’s script for Battle Of The Worlds might very well have tickled his fancy.  (FYI: Di Concini would go on to win the 1963 Oscar for ‘Best Writing, Story, And Screenplay – Written Directly For The Screen’ with his Comedy/Drama Divorce Italian Style, so let’s just agree that the writer ‘had the goods.’)
 
For what it’s worth, Battle Of The Worlds plays out largely very similar thematically and structurally to Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin’s commercially successful popcorn flick, Independence Day (1996), but obviously without all of the visual pomp and circumstance.  Special effects for the early 1960’s involved mostly smoke and mirrors (and a healthy amount of fishing line or wire), and there are plenty of those on display amply throughout this Battle.  While modern audiences have been indoctrinated to expect only the best in their SciFi operas, Margheriti and his crew – production designer Giorgio Giovannini, art director Umberta Cesarano, and set decorator Massimo Tavazzi – clearly had to make do with far less; and yet the film never suffers the way other low budget tales did under the weight of inferior efforts.  Their solutions work well enough to convey the intent of a scene – space battles rely on heavily re-used shots, and the alien environments make use of colored plastic tubing and what looks to be aluminum foil to convey the otherworldly.  If anything, there are a few awkward pieces of obvious animation – faux laser beams and explosive effects – that don’t serve the story as well as they should, but those are small potatoes in the scope of the meal as dished.
​

Also, it bears mentioning that – whereas Independence Day delivered a full ensemble of wonderfully fleshed out primary and secondary characters – Di Concini’s script falls more than a bit short.  The lion’s share of the characterization was heavily piled on to Rains’ Professor Benson.  (Hired as a marquee actor meant to boast both the film’s credibility and bankability, I suspect this was done so that the production could get its money’s worth.)  His irascible curmudgeon of a leading authority on all things associated with the Final Frontier is a big, big performance in what could’ve been an otherwise small movie; and the actor rather easily elevates the work whenever he’s front-and-center.  The end result, however, is that the viewers are treated to a handful of secondary relationships that get little to know development; and perhaps a great deal of nuance gets implied when it should’ve been spelled out in greater detail.  Obviously, there’s some tension between these various people – estrangement gets hinted at here and there, and a great deal of it appears to have been tied to Benson and his tenure – but, alas, nothing gets the kind of exposure it deserves.
 
Still, I stop short of christening Battle as a truly great film.  It’s good – sometimes very good – and it incorporates both harder elements alongside some of cinema’s pulpier sensibilities with grace and conviction.  I think it rather ably demonstrates both what a good Science Fiction film of its era ‘was’ and ‘was becoming.’  Studios weren’t investing much capital in SciFi and Fantasy, so those hired to give them life had to create workable and practical solutions at a time wherein effects studios didn’t exist.  This would change – and change dramatically – in the next decade; and – in some ways – that was owed to the kind of bigger-than-the-sum-of-us stories represented by Battle’s finer moments.  Questions about how we might not be alone in the universe were pushing for bigger and bigger spectacles; what Margheriti and crew accomplished on a budget wouldn’t be possible when Stanley Kubrick’s groundbreaking 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) threw open cinema’s doors to a whole new world.
​

Battle Of The Worlds (1961) – aka Planet Of The Extinct Men – was produced by Ultra Film and Sicilia Cinematografica.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the good folks at The Film Detective.  As for the technical specifications?  Though I’m no trained video expert, the packaging boasts that this version is an all-new 4K scan from an original 35mm archival print; and I thought it looked and sounded very solid, though there are clearly a few frames missing here and there which might add to a bit of viewing frustration (for those offput by such things).
 
As for the special features?  The Film Detective has certainly given interested viewers a package worth considering.  There’s a solid featurette (from Ballyhoo Motion Pictures) that looks back at the films of director Margheriti – I found it good though a bit dry.  There’s an original essay (collector’s booklet) from Don Stradley which also reexamines the director’s contributions to Italian film history – it’s a good read.  But the high point is (film historian) Justin Humphreys’ commentary track: it’s equally inspired and persuasive, so much so that the speaker might very well turn even Battle’s harshest critics into mild fans of the production.  Well done, indeed!
 
Recommended.
 
Look, kids: older Science Fiction flicks are not for everyone, but for those of us who can strip away modern sensibilities, turn off the contemporary noise, and appreciate a good effort made for its day then Battle Of The Worlds feels like a 1960’s attempt to celebrate their Independence Day but on a vastly more affordable budget.  Yes, performances here and there might be a bit stiff, and the script may meander a bit too loosely here and there, but what remains is perhaps a great misunderstood lead role delivered by one of Hollywood’s greats that transcends the usual muck and mire of the B-Movie in a way few others could match.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at The Film Detective provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Battle Of The Worlds (1961) 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.

​-- EZ

It would seem that author Dana Hammer – born and raised in Aberdeen, Washington but now residing in Long Beach, California – has definitely answered her calling: she happily refers to herself a full-time writer, and she’s got the goods to prove it.
 
In fact, in a recent chat with SciFiHistory.Net Ms. Hammer confessed that she can’t remember a time when she wasn’t writing.  “When I young, I was always walking around with the pad of paper or a journal or something that I could write on.  I was always writing stories and skits and dialogue … and I’d have my siblings act out the parts.”
 
Take note: she comes from a family of six siblings … so crafting dialogue for the many and multiple voices is something that now comes easy.  And – by her own admission – the yarns she spins do vary but she almost always finds her way back to the world of Horror Comedy.
 
“With as much as I’ve written,” she says, “and no matter the subject matter, I think I always find the humor in Dystopian-style settings.”
 
It would seem that her unique voice has certainly put her on the literary map.
 
According to her website, one of her first published short stories – “The Unpleasantness In Room 27A” – appeared in It’s All In The Story, a 2017 anthology of short fiction centered on California.  Other tales – “Ali And Amy,” “The Story Of Lorelei,” “The Difference A Thousand Dollars Can Make,” “Tom The Ghost” – followed not long thereafter in other outlets.  For her, 2019 saw the publication of not one but two novels – Dead Viking Rehab and Pazuzu Versus The F***ing Fairies.  Lastly, in 2020, Hammer and fellow author Joanna Ramos crafted The Retreat, the story of a mother and son forced to spend a weekend with a religious cult … and it’s a work that went on to win the 13Horror.Com Film and Screenplay Contest in 2020.
 
With those accolades behind her, Hammer is now focused on her latest project: her novel, The Cannibal’s Guide To Fasting, is set to be released in hardcover and digitally on September 6th from Cinnabar Moth Publishing, LLC.  While she describes it equally as much a Horror Comedy as anything she’s written, she confessed that it ultimately started out for her as a meditation on the topic of addiction.
 
“Having known a few addicts in my life, I started to think about what’s the best way to combat addiction,” she explains.  “Instead of writing directly about drugs, I instead substituted a form of viral cannibalism, and then went about figuring out how we’d tackle that as a society.  Is it control?  Is it punishment?  Maybe it’s a little of both, but – in the end – I wanted there to be a cure, and that’s what the story is … as told through the eyes of an unlikely hero.  I love stories with unlikely heroes.”
 
Her hero?
 
Well, scientist Igor Fenenko looks very little like your carbon-copy bookish brainiac.
 
Towering over six feet tall and built like a Mr. Universe contender (whom she imagines John Cena would be perfect in a movie adaptation, if you’re reading this, Mr. Cena), Fenenko sports the tattoo of a spider etched into the lines on his face.  Like so many who were infected by Pestis Manducans, he inevitably succumbed to the taste of human flesh and – as a consequence – winds up being corralled against his wishes into the government’s relocation facilities.  Though he’s finally controlled his hunger for his fellow man, he’s startled to find out that there are others out there privately seeking to make full-blown cannibalism a way of life … and the secret mastermind behind it all turns out to be his very own brother!
 
“I love gentle giants, but there’s nothing autobiographical about this one,” she assures me with a laugh.  “Well, except maybe how Igor interacts with Elli (a young player the scientist befriends in the novel).  I drew a bit of inspiration on Elli from my daughter, but that’s all.”
 
Though the book has not seen wide release at this point, Hammer says that her publisher – Cinnabar Moth Publishing, LLC – indicates that it’s pre-selling well.  As is the case often when novels are on-the-horizon, several media outlets have been provided advance review copies, and a few notices have already appeared on the Information Superhighway.  As of today’s date, the book has 13 ratings on the popular Goodreads.com website with an aggregate score of 4.77 (out of 5.00).
 
(SciFiHistory.Net has received an advance copy, and our review will be appearing on the site very soon.)
 
Hammer remains hopeful regarding the success of Fasting and has even taken steps to prepare should further opportunities present themselves.  “I’ve written a pilot for a series, if anyone’s interested, and I’m thinking of ways to expand the story.”
 
Important links:

Pre-order your copy of The Cannibal’s Guide To Fasting on Amazon.com (link)
Dana Hammer website https://www.danahammer.com/
Cinnabar Moth Publishing LLC (link)

Readers, take note: this is why I always (ALWAYS!) caution folks to never get all that attached to projects before they're actually scheduled for release.

In all honesty, I thought something might be up when -- not all that long ago -- there was a sudden flurry of news blurbs hitting the Information Superhighway about (all of a sudden) these Warner Bros. and DC Comics properties being turned into major motion pictures, telefilms, and television series.  Why, it seemed like a week wouldn't go by without yet one more piece of comic book intellectual property was going to be given an adaptation!  Casts were announced!  Directors were hired!  Scripts were being written!  By gosh and by golly, it just seemed like there would be no end to it!

And -- dare I mention this -- it all happened not all that long after Hollywood superspender and creative AntiChrist (my term) JJ Abrams was suddenly gifted All Things DC by the suits at Warner Bros.

Hmm ...

Even back at the time, I thought a number of these projects were a bit suspect.  After all, a few of them involved superheroes that -- no disrespect intended as I'm one of DC Comics' longer lasting fans -- just weren't big names.  You know?  They certainly didn't have marquee credentials.  Blue Beetle?  The Wonder Twins?  Batgirl?  Yes, yes, yes, each property -- along with their respective characters -- certainly have their own audience.  It'd be silly to argue otherwise.  But a solid handful of them going into active development ... all at the same time ... with no advance preparation or market testing or anything that's typically gone into building a brand?  Really?

Lo and behold, a few months back it was announced that Warner Bros. new management had begun rethinking some of these assignments.  From what little speculation had been put into the blogosphere, some of this was owed to the creative destruction left in the wake of the Justice League movie -- don't even get me started on the whole Joss Whedon and Zack Snyder business -- as well as the fact that none of these projects had turned much (if any) profit.  And -- if memory serves me -- it was about this time that the blibs and blurbs started to leak out about how the DC TV properties on The CW had, essentially, bankrupted a network and even pushed the whole shebang so very deeply into the red that the channel was put up on the seller's block for anyone who wanted it.  The future of these shows was suddenly in question, and word recently hit the web that the beloved incarnation of The Flash starring Grant Gustin would be ending with a truncated season next year.  (Mind you: all of this hit also not all that long as did the news involving the silver screen 'star' Ezra Miller had been engaging in what looked to be a life of debauchery while on Warner Bros.'s dime.)

See ... nothing in or about Hollywood happens in a vacuum, people.  If you're hearing these things being featured so predominantly in the press, then that likely means that somewhere some suit wants you to hear these things ... and that suit is likely hoping it'll inflict the maximum amount of damage to serve whatever secret and nefarious cause he or she supports.

It looks like that goal was achieved.  Executives have been fired.  The future of The CW, HBO Max, and a whole lot of intellectual property has been put in doubt ... and now the Batgirl film -- which has actually been completed -- is being permanently shelved so that the studio can claim its $90 million budget as a tax loss.

Ouch.

Just how bad must that film be?

Anyone who has done any bit of serious reading regarding some of the dumbest things Warner Bros. executives are allegedly to have said about the DC Comics films knows that this hasn't been the happiest creative marriage in all of Tinseltown.  As is often the case when mergers of this sort happen, there's a love/hate relationship that blossoms very quickly; when those emotions are not brought under control, then both sides are apt to develop some bad blood along the way.  I'm not entirely certain what any suit who greenlit a Batgirl movie was thinking -- especially putting it in the hands of a two-person directing team with no established track record in genre projects much less superhero stuff.  Perhaps they thought, "Well, Batgirl isn't a big name, how big could the risk really be?"  "Maybe it'll score well with the kids."  "If anything, maybe the youth will confuse it with a Marvel movie and come to ours anyway?"

Whatever the truth may be and whatever efforts that went into creating a film that has been dubbed "irredeemable" by test audiences, I suspect there will be a few more heads chopped in the days ahead for the Batgirl supporters.

At least we can watch that from afar and enjoy the popcorn.

​-- EZ