The Dark Crystal

Directed by: Jim Henson, Frank Oz

Written by: Jim Henson (story), David Odell (screenplay)

Every once in a while, a movie comes along that takes a different direction than any other film that came before it. The film, then, is revolutionary not because it changes the way movies are made, but because it shows that a different way of making movies is possible. "The Dark Crystal" is that kind of film.

As the film begins, the evil Skeksis have ruled for a thousand years, having exiled the gentle Mystics and nearly wiped out the race of Gelflings. But Jen, the last surviving Gelfling, is on a mission to fulfill the prophecy that will end the reign of the Skeksis. Along the way, he encounters various creatures, including the mysterious Aughra and Kira (another Gelfling). But will Jen be able to replace the crystal shard and restore the Dark Crystal before it's too late?

What sets apart "The Dark Crystal" from any other film is that it contains no actors despite the fact that it is a live-action film. Puppets designed by Jim Henson - and not his floppy, if fun, Muppets - populate the world of this film. This has the effect of heightening the fantasy element of the film without drawing from cartoonish effects.

"The Dark Crystal" has its flaws. It's plot is slow in unwinding itself, and a large chunk of the film is spent in necessary exposition. Many of the scenes feel episodic and disconnected. The puppets are also limited in their movements and expressions - although this is made in comparison to modern CGI effects.

Of course, it's hard to compare "The Dark Crystal" to anything else because there is nothing else quite like it. It can only be seen and appreciated on its own.

I like to think of "The Dark Crystal" like an experimental album. Beyond rating it as good and bad, it is simply different. And that difference makes it meaningful.

The Thing

Every once in a while - though probably more often than I'd like to admit - I get the urge to see a good horror movie. Nothing to keep me up at night, mind you. Just a good fright. The last time I got that itch, John Carpenter's "The Thing," scratched it perfectly.

The premise of the movie is simple enough: The team at a (dubiously) scientific research outpost in Antarctica finds itself infiltrated by an alien life-form which can replicate itself into nearly any body - human or animal. One by one, the team members - led by helicopter pilot MacReady (Kurt Russell) become survivors, trying to keep the alien from getting leaving Antarctica and decimating the earth's population.

This movie has some pretty amazing moments of suspense. The scene in which the survivors have to submit to a blood test managed to keep the tension incredibly high with relatively little dialogue or action. The climactic attempt to destroy the monster managed to keep me near the edge of my seat (not "on" the edge, though), considering that most of the tropes used were basically cliche.

My favorite moment, though, is right at the end. I love the fact that the conclusion of the movie is left wonderfully ambiguous. Two survivors remain, each suggesting that the other may be the monster in disguise. Yet, without the necessary equipment, they are each powerless to stop the other or prove themselves innocent. They, like the viewer, are left to wonder whether or not humanity is safe. For a brief moment, just before the credits roll, the viewer and the characters have the exact same perspective.

The special-effects in this movie are gruesome and gory, although the stop-motion creature sequences seem a bit waxy and choppy. I think the creature would have been more terrifying if director John Carpenter had taken a cue from Ridley Scott's work in "Alien": a monster is often most terrifying when you have no idea what it looks like or how it kills. Seeing so much of the best so early in the film trivialized it. The Thing became tangible and limited, while much of what makes a creature horrible is that, when left vague and abstract, it can become almost anything capable of limitless terror.

From the primitive premise, clunky dialogue, straight acting, and absurdly huge special effects, this movie has "B film" written all over it. But the synergy of all those parts manages to elevate it to a "B+ film" - or even an "A- film" when watched in just the right mood.

Director: John Carpenter

Written by: John W. Campbell Jr. (story), Bill Lancaster (screenplay)

The Gunslinger

Ever since I was a little boy, I’ve always gone to Steven to get my haircut. And as long as I can remember talking to Steven about books, I’ve known that Steven is a Stephen King fanatic. As I started to grow more mature in my reading, Steven’s influence flexed its grip, and I began reading Stephen King as well. Although I’ve read several of King’s novels – including the massive undertaking “The Stand” – I’ve never attempted his series of novels “The Dark Tower.” This all changed when I got a haircut two weeks ago. Steven said he had something for me, and then brought out a bag from Pei Wei filled with the first six books of “The Dark Tower” sequence. Although the bag weighs at least twenty pounds, without representing the entire text of the series, I dove right in, beginning (obviously) with the first book of the series (which is, coincidentally, by far the shortest).

“The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger” begins the epic quest of Roland, the last Gunslinger. As we meet him, he his chasing “the man in black” across a desert in some sort of western-fantasy world. Apparently, Roland has been chasing him for a long, long time and has very recently been catching up. In the first part of the novel, Roland walks into a trap the man in black has set up in a know-nothing town, and the only way out is to, quite literally, kill every person in the small city (including his own lover). Further on, at an abandoned way station in the desert the Gunslinger encounters a boy – Jake – who apparently died in our world (at the hands of the man in black) only to re-awaken in Roland’s world. The Gunslinger allows Jake to join his quest, and the two miraculously cross a seemingly endless desert to arrive at the mountains – with the man in black now in sight. The pair encounters a malicious oracle who suggests that Roland will have to kill the boy if he wants to catch his quarry. As Roland and Jake pursue the man in black through the caverns of the mountain, they are attacked by Slow Mutants (human like creatures with distorted features who glow in the dark) and narrowly escape. With the cavern’s exit within reach, the man in black blocks their egress, and Jake clings desperately to the side of a rail-bridge. Roland has to choose between the boy and the man in black and, painfully, chooses the main in black. The novel ends with the man in black revealing that their dying world is just a single grain on a piece of grass in an even larger universe – all part of an infinitely large and small chain of worlds. Roland is set off on his quest to find the Dark Tower (a nexus between the many worlds) and to face off against The Beast who guards it.

Of course, that’s all merely the main story. Through the course of a few flashbacks and “firelight stories,” we learn a lot about Roland’s past (though many mysteries are also raised in the aftermath). For example, we learn that he grew up in highly regimented and caste-regulated society. This court resembles, loosely, Arthurian legends, although the noble knights are replaced with gunslinging cowboys. Yet, sometime between Roland’s childhood and the “present” of the novel, there has been a devastating war and that world is “dying,” leaving Roland as the last true Gunslinger. There are lots of references to Roland’s father being cuckolded, a vicious trickster named Marten, and a beautiful woman named Susan – but these references remain murky.

The world that King establishes in the first of “The Dark Tower” books can be best imagined as a hybrid between Clint Eastwood’s early westerns (lots of isolated towns, desolation, dirt, and sweat) and King Arthur’s court (class structures, knights and maidens). This comparison is practically invited by the reference to a wizard from our world named “Maerlyn” (think: Merlin). There are also elements of traditional quest stories and poems – notably “The Odyssey” of course. Also, apparently the name Roland is a reference to a Robert Browning poem (but, at this point, I’m too lazy to care about the allusion beyond what is mentioned in the afterword to the book).

There is a strange connection between our world and Roland’s world. The boy Jake somehow leapt between the two worlds. A gas pipe at the way station in the middle of the desert seems to connect the two worlds. There’s even a strange subway-like terminal that Roland and Jake walk through in the middle of the caverns of the western mountains – although the remains of those working at the station have apparently been dead for a very, very long time.

Our protagonist – Roland, the last Gunslinger – provides an interesting point of discussion. He is not necessarily sympathetic – heartlessly choosing his own ambition over saving the boy Jake. Yet, at the same time, we find it hard to judge him. Although we quest with him for 216 pages (at least, in the edition I read), we hardly get to know him. Sure, we know that he was the youngest boy ever to earn the title “Gunslinger” and that something bad went down between Marten (the man in black’s master) and Roland’s father – but, to be honest, that’s all we really find out. We never even quite find out why he’s chasing the man in black – and that goal alone makes up the main conflict of the novel.

Considering that there are at least six more books in this series (more, if King keeps adding to the epic), I’m finding it hard to judge here the value of the entire sequence of novels. Ultimately, “The Gunslinger” provides mere exposition for the longer series, while also allowing us a little glimpse into this strange (but fascinating) universe. I just hope that the rest of the series picks up the pace a little bit, because “The Gunslinger” was painfully slow at parts. At the very least, I can see how “The Gunslinger” provides a lot of food-for-thought for a fantasy reader and gives a rich and unique universe for Roland to wander through on his quest for The Dark Tower.

(The next book in the series: “The Dark Tower: The Drawing of the Three”!)