Projecting Tomorrow: science fiction and popular cultureJAMES CHAPMAN and NICHOLAS J.CULL

London/New York, I.B. Tauris, 2013240 pp., illus., £14.00 (paper)

Professors James Chapman and Nicholas J. Cull’s previous collaboration, ProjectingEmpire: imperialism and popular cinema (2009), is obviously the model for their newbook on science fiction films. It spans from Just Imagine (1930) to Avatar (2009) in12 chapters written alternately by the two authors. Each chapter is an essay of anindividual title, except for chapter 4, which is about the British Quatermass series.The result leaves me with a sense of both gratification and frustration. The gratifi-cation of readable texts that outline comprehensive studies of the selected filmsand the frustration of never getting the full in-depth treatment.

In his introduction to the book, Chapman argues for using empirical investiga-tions and historical contexts. Rightly so. During the course of the book, we glimpsethe rewards of digging into the archives while keeping an eye on the social, political,cultural, economic and industrial context of the productions. In what might be thebiggest praise of this collection of texts, the reader truly gets his/her appetites whet-ted as Projecting Tomorrow cries out for closer studies into the films based on H. G.Wells’ work. Or the Planet of Apes cycle, including the two reboots released in 2001and 2011. Or on individual titles such as RoboCop (1987) or Avatar (2009). Thereseem to be so much to motivate a more thorough investigation of each and every oneof the cases, which are only loosely connected to one another in the volume.

Just look at Avatar as a corrective to centuries of colonial myths about thesavage Other in imperial fiction and the western genre. Characteristic of the book,Cull packs his political analysis of the film into just two pages. Not bad. In fact, itis an excellent summary written in the terse prose the authors cultivate. But itmisses the film’s intricate deconstruction of this propaganda tradition, from detailssuch as the casting of Wes Studi in a role that counters his breakthrough perfor-mance as the villainous Mohawk Magua in the 1992 film adaptation of The Last ofthe Mohicans to the concept of frontiersmen—in the American West as well as inspace—living under the threat of losing their English souls when crossing the racialdivide. Avatar is perhaps the unsurpassed study of what it means to ‘go native.’

Then there is the question of the selection of titles—all well-known American orBritish examples of the genre, save for the now-forgotten Just Imagine (1930). In hisintroduction, Chapman pre-empts such criticism by the hint of a possible sequel, Pro-jecting Tomorrow 2, including another list of American or British genre classics. WhileI understand the attraction to the titles in this book as well as of the alternative list oftitles to the follow-up, it would be refreshing to get a broader perspective beyond themainstream. Why not extend the study to films from other countries?

A truly alternative list could then include titles such as Aelita (USSR, 1924), TheMan Who Thought Life (Denmark, 1969), The Quiet Earth (New Zealand, 1985) and2009: Lost Memories (South Korea, 2002). Even including neglected English-languageworks, such as the mind-boggling low-budget time-travel film Primer (US, 2004),would challenge the canonical tradition of Important Anglo-American Titles morethan just excluding the most usual of suspects—Blade Runner, the Terminator and Alienfilms. I know it requires the collaboration of archives, perhaps also scholars, in the

180 H I S T O R I C A L J O U R N A L O F F I L M , R A D I O A N D T E L E V I S I O N

respective countries, but such a book would certainly be an eye-opener, bringingwell-deserved attention to the merits of works presently ignored or consideredmarginal.

Furthermore, the question of style is largely left unmentioned, perhaps becausethe genre is so diverse in style. But then, which genre is not? Nearly all of the filmsincluded by Chapman and Cull have been made using studio sets and elaboratevisual effects. Yet, the only one that provokes any discussion of style is the docu-mentary-influenced The Hellstrom Chronicles (1971). However, the title of the finalchapter on Avatar—’The Image as Hero’—is largely applicable to all the worksmentioned. In fact, science fiction is the one genre that throughout film history hasstuck closest to Tom Gunning’s concept of the cinema of attractions, regardless ofany realist touches. Visual spectacles are highlighted to the degree that they becomeregular showstoppers so we can take in the full splendour of a future world, a sinis-ter new weapon or an alien encounter of the gruesome kind. More elaborate com-ments on the cinematography, production design and editing would be appropriate,including the use of frame enlargements, rather that production stills.

Above reservations aside, Projecting Tomorrow is a riveting study of science fiction,one I can recommend as an introduction to the genre. It features accessible textssuitable for a wide range of readers, from cinemaniacs, genre buffs and basic-levelfilm students to veteran scholars. Leaving theoretical grand narratives behind whilesticking to no-nonsense empirical research and historical annotations, the book willstand the test of time, no doubt. An added attraction is that Chapman and Cull areboth scholars and fans, which makes their texts into an enjoyable combination ofintellectual rigour with playful comments. Their enthusiasm shines through in everyother sentence, and it is catching. Seeing Quatermass 2 again without thinking of thepolitical subtext as well as Brian Donlevy’s struggle to conceal the loss of his toupee,gone in the winds during the exterior shooting, will be impossible.

MICHAEL TAPPER

Lund University© 2014 Michael Tapper

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01439685.2013.872479

Film Stardom, Myth and Classicism: the rise of Hollywood’s godsMICHAEL WILLIAMS

Basingstoke/London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013x+252 pp., illus., $85.00, £55.00 (paper)

Michael Williams is a dynamic scholar, author of Ivor Novello: screen idol andco-editor of British Silent Cinema and the Great War. These subjects already suggesttwo areas of interest, which are found in Film Stardom, Myth and Classicism: thestudy of the stars and the interest for the representation of history. The ideabehind the book is to draw a parallel between the gods and goddesses of the screenand those of Greco-Roman antiquity, and also the way film, and more globallyvisual culture, explicitly and implicitly references ancient Greece and Rome. As hesays in the introduction: ‘Olympus Moves to Hollywood.’ Already, in his book on

B O O K R E V I E W S 181