#be something nice and lighthearted like a romcom or a coming of age

[literary-illuminati]

2024 Book Review #17 – Terra Incognita by Connie Willis

Connie Willis is a name I have heard come up a lot with regard to late 20th century American Science Fiction, but in a slightly odd way. The only thing she’s actually written that I’ve ever heard of is To Say Nothing of the Dog (a delightful-sounding book that tragically has a multimonth hold list at my library). Instead, I mostly know her from other books’ acknowledgement sections, or semi-mythologized folklore and anecdotes about the culture and community of the era. So I really picked this up as a matter of curiosity, to get a sense of what Willis’ whole deal is.

The book is a collection of three novellas, each basically totally unrelated with only the faintest attempt at a unifying theme to justify bundling the three of them together. Each work is pretty different from the others in everything from length (the longest is something like 3x the length of the shortest), tone, setting and subject matter, the works really. The first is a sort of romcom farce about surveyors charting an alien world that has, well, aged. The second and longest a love letter to classic classic hollywood and movie musicals as told from the POV of a self-hating drunk who pays the bills going through and retroactively editing the studio’s back catalogue to meet the whims of the executive of the day. The third and by far shortest is a lighthearted and very fannish comedy about a teenager getting conscripted to be a space cadet against her own ferocious objections.

The stories are all perfectly modern in, like, structure and pacing, but they still absolutely feel like they were written last century. Part of that is just word choice (the only thing that ages worse than old euphemisms for sex is old attempts to create futuristic slang), but it’s also just a general sensibility. Which is most cringe-inducing in the first story, both for its portrayal of the native species of the planet being surveyed (directly compared to native americans a few different times, characterized as relentlessly opportunistic penny-wise but pound-foolish hucksters leaping at the chance to sell their land for cheap imported consumer goods), and also just for a handling of gender and sexuality it’d take more time than I’ve got to really dig into. (I have a sense of where all those tomboy versus girly girl memes ultimately descend from now, though.) The other two more just felt out of time than actually wince-inducing, with the third story especially feeling like an affectionate nod to the fan culture of a different era. That said, the second one’s whole horrified preoccupation with a Hollywood that refuses to make anything new instead of just remaking the same sure things from its back catalog forevermore either never stopped or has looped back around to feeling real topical.

Insofar as I’m already reading romances, I admit I do have a real soft spot for the whole ‘idiots compensate for total refusal to communicate feelings with grand romantic gestures and hoping the object of their desires will get the idea. It doesn’t work.’ thing that’s a bit of a recurring beat in two of the novellas though.

Prose and characterization wise, all three were pretty well done – though riffing off tropes and archetypes that I honestly can’t remember the last time I’ve seen played sincerely and unironically, which did always leave me feeling I was missing context on how to read them. Which is pretty much what I was hoping for going in, to be clear – what’s the point of reading older stories, otherwise? Which is nice, because the actual reading experience of going through it was a bit of a slog. The first one was the real trial, but just overall I’d say the book’s more interesting as a cultural artifact than an artistic work. Oh well, c’est la vie.

[zendyval]

Having watched the film 3 times my unpopular opinion that this film should have been marketed as a romcom and had a rating of pg-13. That scene with Z and the boys in the bed is so funny as oppose to deeply erotic and that would've have allowed most of her fanbase to go see the film because most cabt see r rated films. Like, if they had took out the Patrick lockeroom scene, it would have been pg-13.

I went with friends, and since I've read forums, and concluded that their opinions were unenthusiastic about the movie due to the leads being unknown and for most unattractive, which is crazy to me, and the lack of sexy scenes. Most ppl thought the movie was going to be deeply erotic and were not amused it wasn't.

Not to compare her to Sydney, but Sydney's fanbase is mainly men and young women. She has done nude scenes and sex scenes, and most ppl want to see her films because of it. I love Z, but I don't think she understands she has a large fanbase who isn't of age to watch her stuff or mainly know her from Disney and Spiderman. I even asked ppl who have watched Dune if they rate her performance higher than those role. I think that because that level of scifi is niche, but they still compare her performance as MJ as something they like or prefer. Euphoria is very popular online, but where I'm from, it's not something ppl watch. Like most ppl would watch Emily in Paris or Bridgerton because it's lighthearted and the characters are likeable. I know she wants to do darker roles and can cause her emmy-winning portrayal of Rue, but most of the gp loves her due to her down to earth appearance because she's nice and jovial. Perhaps a role where she plays a character than leans into her skills as a singer and fashionable person would be ideal. I hope it doesn't come across like she can't do darker and unlikeable roles. It's just niche in this current climate. It's why Succesion, although a critical acclaim show, had a low rating throughout Istanbul runtime because ppl don't like unlikeable characters.

It's hard to sell a film where given the thin premise and largely only 3 characters, this film indeed would have been better at 90 minutes rather than 2 hours. Again, I love long, although films, but I'm aware I'm the minority. Most ppl are not film geeks. They prefer blue-collar stories to relate to.

But I think this lends to a question...are people supposed to making movies based on what gets the greatest box office return and what makes the most money or based on the kind of movie they want to make? Because taking Z out of the equation, making Challengers a rom com is not Luca's speed. I don't think you're going to get Luca Guadagnino to make a PG-13 rom com, and I've got nothing against rom coms but it seems like you're saying the movie should have been a thing that's different from what it was meant to be, which then makes it an entirely different movie

Also the film is generally well received...so I'm not sure I totally get all of it. If they made the changes you or your friends want then likely a lot of the people that loved it would no longer love it. I get film is subjective so it's cool if certain things didn't vibe for you or your friends, but I don't think we can pretend that the movie also did work for a lot of people on many levels.

I also think as someone mentioned yesterday, I'm not sure cutting out one or two scenes would get them a PG-13 though just because cursing more than an at minimum amount still gets you an R rating, but I'm not sure on that one.

Also whether one likes Challengers or not, or thinks it's a good movie or not, or even if they like Z as an actress or not, I don't necessarily think it's her responsibility to only stick with making movies that her fans can see. First I'd argue most of the generations that grew up with her on Disney are now over 18. Maybe not the ones from Spidey or ones catching her in reruns.

But I also think it comes back to, are studios making movies by number to get the highest possible box office or are we letting directors and filmmakers tell the stories they want to tell--for me the answer is somewhere in the middle because I get the bottom line matters, but I also suspect had Z never gotten involved with Challengers, this movie would have been made mostly for art house crowds. It only got a wide release because of Z's fame.

I definitely think this is a niche film, as is Euphoria despite it's popularity, but I'm not sure I think any actor or actress should feel confined to only take a small variety of roles so as to maximize box office.

[lonelier-version-of-you]

That was a pretty good episode. Certainly much better than last week. How much of this was the presence of Russ, and how much was the fact that the episode was written by Andy Bayliss (who is a much better writer than Davey Jones... sorry to Davey Jones, but he’s just not that good), I don’t know, but either way it was a great improvement.

Out of respect, I shall put the weekly Henruss commentary aside for a moment in order to talk about Jac.

So. Jac Naylor is terminally ill. We knew it from the spoilers, of course, but it’s still terribly depressing.

Both Jac as a character and Rosie Marcel as an actress deserve so much better than this. Rosie has suffered through so much for the show, including pain that the producers themselves have put her through - I still can’t believe the idea of doing a breakdown storyline for Jac based off Rosie’s own real life breakdown was considered, let alone that it actually happened. And Jac? The writers have put her through so much trauma over the years. She’s been shot, experimented on, had her sister die, been sectioned, and that’s just a few examples. How is it remotely satisfactory or a good ending to kill her off after putting her through all that?

The worst part is that for months after bringing her back and revealing she had a brain tumour, the show basically ignored her. There were a good few months where there was more focus on Amelia’s brain tumour than Jac’s, and Amelia is a minor recurring character. It took until there were less than 15 episodes left for Jac to start getting any focus at all. What the hell, Holby? You’re killing off your most iconic and popular character and you still took until the last second to start caring about her? Yikes.

Do they think they’re doing something clever or original here, in killing off Jac to symbolise the end of the show? Because they’re not. For characters like Jac, in fact, tragedy is an incredibly common end. She’s gender non-conforming, mentally ill, an abuse survivor, an implicitly queer woman. Seeing her end the show alive and happy would be far more original than making every moment of her life, through to the very end, nothing but a tragedy.

And no, Holby, giving a mentally ill, abuse survivor, queer man a happy ending does not make up for what you’re doing to Jac. It just doesn’t. I’m happy Henrik’s coming out and finding love, I really, truly am. But if anything, giving Henrik a happy ending and Jac a tragic one just comes across as misogynistic.

(Having said that, their idea of a happy ending for Jac now is probably pairing her off with Fletch anyway. Even though neither Rosie Marcel nor Alex Walkinshaw like the pairing, and the characters decided they were better off as friends ages ago. :/)

Wasn’t there literally an interview with some old producers or something where they said the plan was always for Jac to eventually get a happy ending? Sometimes... sticking to your original plans... is better, Holby.

Jac, I’m sorry the writers are treating you like this. And I feel even sorrier for Rosie Marcel herself.

Now that that’s over with: I bet Andy Bayliss, writer of the most queer-coded Johnrik episodes/scenes, must have pumped his fist in the air upon learning that Henrik was getting an actual romance with a man and he would get to write for it. Their scenes tonight certainly delivered!

I wasn’t expecting more than two or three scenes, since they weren’t mentioned in the DS spoilers, so I’m satisfied with what we got. It was also some nice lighthearted romcom fun, before we get some presumably more serious stuff with Billie’s secret next week.

The “Russ is creepy and manipulative” crowd were, I imagine, dismayed to find out that Russ is actually so good-natured he felt guilty for eating someone else’s salad. Me, I found it adorable. (Also, I’m still sticking with my headcanon that Billie started making Russ’s lunches because Russ has executive dysfunction and was always forgetting to bring his own, and she wanted to make sure he didn’t forget. Also possible that Ami used to make Russ’s lunches, for the same reason, and Billie felt a need to continue her dad’s tradition. Which is... sweet but sad.)

I did feel sorry for Henrik, though. The poor man and his sensory issues. I hope he managed to find something to eat somewhere, even if he just got himself something from the vending machine.

Russ is very lucky Henrik fancies him. I think Henrik would probably be quite bitter if anyone else took his lunch. He certainly wouldn’t tolerate them talking with their mouths full!

And HENRIK OFFERING TO MAKE RUSS’S LUNCH OMG. That was SO CUTE. And then when he was looking in the mirror and adjusting his shirt and tie to impress Russ!! Henrik with a crush is always the cutest thing ever.

Lots of mentions of Billie tonight, presumably to remind everyone she exists for her re-appearance next week. Also basically confirmation that they made Russ an overprotective dad to contrast with Henrik not having been in his kid’s life at all.

Elsewhere: Will Fletch Stay Or Will He Go? Does anyone care? I don’t, really. He bores me. I can’t hate him, he’s just bland. He should’ve left a few months after Raf’s exit IMO.

Amelia is getting better! I’m happy for her. Genuinely expected her to die either way.

Sacha and Dom are doing research together, I guess. Good for them.

And poor, poor Nicky. My heart is breaking for her. The last few scenes tonight were really powerful - Belinda Owusu and Rosie Marcel are both such brilliant actresses.