Now he lives on anxiety, coffee and chocolate — Sci-Fi Sundaze

Enjoy this aerial shot of London as you start split Second (1992), as it’s about the last recognisable shot of the city.

And there we have the setting for this movie: London 2008, a city plagued by global warming and decades of pollution, which in practise means most of the sets are covered in scummy water and everything is fogged up. None of this setup actually matters to the plot and there isn’t any real reason this was set in the future. This is the least science fictional science fiction movie ever. Instead this is a combination of a serial killer movie and a buddy cop movie, just gussied up with a few sfnal props and weapons. Apart from the climax of the movie being set in a flooded Underground, there’s no real reason that this movie takes place in London either. In fact, most of the movies takes place on sets that could’ve just as well be used for some random American city.

Rutger Hauer isn’t necessarily the most subtle of actors even in the best of times, but I’ve never seen him chew the scenery as enthusiastically as he does here. Hauer started his career as a teenage heart throb in a medieval adventure series in the Netherland, before starring in several Dutch cult classics like Turks Fruit and Soldaat van Oranje. When the director of these movies, Paul Verhoeven, moved to Hollywood Hauer followed him. You know him of course as Roy Batty in Blade Runner, but perhaps also as the villain in The Hitcher, or from Flesh + Blood or Ladyhawke. His movies aren’t always classics, but they’re always entertaining. In Split Second he’s Harley Stone, a hard bitten cop who lost his partner to a serial killer three years ago. Now the killer is back and Hauer is on his tracks. the stereotypical loner cop, Hauer listens to nobody and doesn’t let anything or anyone stop him from pursuing the killer. Why he has to do all that in an American accent when the movie’s set in London is never explained.

Meanwhile almost every other actor in the movie is somebody who you’d probably remember from having guest starred on Coronation Street or from having had a critically acclaimed role in some worthy BBC drama. Here we have Alun Armstrong as the police chief Trasher spouting the usual cop movie cliches to Neil Duncan, the soon to be new partner to Rutger Hauer. Both of these weren’t new to playing cops, Armstrong having been in The Sweeney and Duncan in Taggart, but here they are in what is clearly an American cop flick, somewhat out of place. Duncan especially, though he’s well suited for playing the book smart, sensitive, health conscious rookie that will get on surprisingly well with Hauer’s paranoid veteran surviving on “anxiety, coffee and chocolate”.

That mixture of American cop cliches and British actors makes for a strange movie. It actually took me until this scene, some forty minutes into its one and a half hour run time that Split Second clicked for me. Once again a familiar scene. Hauer takes Durban to his favourite bar with Durban having won a little bit of his trust. As Hauer munches down on a full English and Durban asks for a fancy tea and a crossaint, they share theories on the serial killer. Meanwhile, in Hauer’s flat, his murdered partner’s ex-girlfriend is having a shower; cue the Psycho music. Cue also a quick glimpse of Kim Cattrall’s breasts, because of course. All this is played completely straight, but the absurdity of this sort of cop movie cliche playing out against a background track of the Moody Blues’ Nights in White Satin makes it all slightly absurd. And you can’t tell me this wasn’t intentional.

Because even in 1992 everything in this movie was cliched and hackneyed, yet you have a cast of serious character actors who all deliver their absurd lines with complete earnestness. Granted, this could all be a case of “I haven’t seen the movie, but I have seen the house the movie bought”, but I doubt it. This feels more like a cast having fun with something they know on its own is bad, but by taking it ultra serious, can be made into something hilarious. And that’s the charm of this movie, even if it was done by accident. Having Hauer and Durban act the shit out of their roles in their own way is what makes this movie for me. Don’t watch it for the plot, or for the science fiction, such as it is. Watch it for actors having fun. Nothing in this movie really makes sense, but you’ll enjoy it nonetheless.

Science fiction makes metaphors literal

And sometimes they’re not even metaphors, but shitty rightwing jokes about trans people, as Isabel Fall managed in her short story I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter:

I sexually identify as an attack helicopter.

I lied. According to US Army Technical Manual 0, The Soldier as a System, “attack helicopter” is a gender identity, not a biological sex. My dog tags and Form 3349 say my body is an XX-karyotope somatic female.

So the original “joke” is that being trans or non-binary is so outrageous that you might as well call yourself an attack helicopter. What Isabel Fall does with it is in the best tradition of science fiction: taking that idea and exploring what it really means to have your gender set to attack helicopter. Not as a metaphor, but literally. Because that’s what science fiction does, making metaphors literal. Creating impossible things for its own merit, rather than as symbols standing in for real world concerns. Even as it’s always rooted in the real world and its contemporary issues, like this story is from its very title.

A shitty joke weaponised by bigots to harass trans people; the title isn’t neutral of course. Anybody who is trans or non-binary or genderqueer, or who like me, a well intentioned cis person, will hesitate on seeing that title, cringe and prepare for the worst kind of rightwing satire. My own concerns about this were lessened because a) I trusted the person who tweeted about the story not to be a transphobe and b) I trusted Clarkesworld were it appeared, not given to outbursts of transphobia as far as I know. After reading the story I knew it couldn’t have worked half as well under another title, but this does not take away the fact that for a lot of people it will make them suspicious or dismiss it out of hand of not worth reading. It explains some of the backlash against what was seemingly intended to tweak the nose of transphobes by making their one obnoxious joke real, by earnestly asking what if your gender was attack helicopter.

What would that mean? How would it express itself?

Now I yield to speed walkers in the hall like I need to avoid fouling my rotors.

Now walking beneath high-tension power lines makes me feel the way that a cis man would feel if he strutted down the street in a miniskirt and heels.

I’m comfortable in open spaces but only if there’s terrain to break it up. I hate conversations I haven’t started; I interrupt shamelessly so that I can make my point and leave.

At the same time this is obviously still a commentary on gender and gender dysphoria as experienced by a trans woman, as the writer has identified herself as, after the internet got hold of the story. You can no longer read this story. It has been taken offline on request of the writer, was scrubbed even from the Internet Archive afterwards. I started writing this review six months ago, in the first flush of enthusiasm after having read it. But then the backlash began as people took the title personal, as critics went on their first impression that this was a rightwing piss take, without checking to see if they were correct.

But how often—really—do you think about the grand strategy of gender? The mess of history and sociology, biology and game theory that gave rise to your pants and your hair and your salary? The casus belli?

Often, you might say. All the time. It haunts me.

There’s sometimes a tendency in queer circles to judge each other more harshly than necessary. You’d better be perfect, know exactly how to display and name your own identity, you’d better not be messy or unsure. A large part of that is a defence mechanism against homophobes and transphobes and other enemies, where any sign of uncertainty or not fitting quite in with the orthodoxy of what the trans|gay|lesbian|etc experience should be can be and has been used to attack the community. For trans people in the UK and US especially, the last few years have been tough, with their rights under renewed attack by the right, aided and abetted by quislings from within the communities, people who say they’re queer but want to kick the “T” out of LGBT. No wonder there’s so much mistrust and Isabel Fall became a victim of it. Alexandra Erin probably put it best in her her thread on why she wouldn’t read this story. I disagree with her, but she makes some good points on why not everybody saw this story as a triumph.

When I was a woman I wanted to be good at woman. I wanted to darken my eyes and strut in heels. I wanted to laugh from my throat when I was pleased, laugh so low that women would shiver in contentment down the block.

And at the same time I resented it all. I wanted to be sharper, stronger, a new-made thing, exquisite and formidable. Did I want that because I was taught to hate being a woman? Or because I hated being taught anything at all?

Now I am jointed inside. Now I am geared and shafted, I am a being of opposing torques. The noise I make is canceled by decibel killers so I am no louder than a woman laughing through two walls.

But the backlash went further than that. It wasn’t just that people got hurt by the story or its title despite the author’s intentions, it was that some people went to great pains to take offence at it and read it in the worst possible way. Where a J. K. Rowling could be openingly transphobic for years until a backlash here it only took hours before it was decided that Isabell Fall was a wrong one. Instead of criticising the story, it quickly devolving into attacking the author as a person, questioning her motivations with even some attempts to dox her. I hesitate to complain about “cancel culture” because usually it’s used to whinge about how people object to some rapist giving a speech at their uni, but this really felt like it. People taking offense and attacking a powerless, no-name trans woman because it would in some way make the world safer for trans women like the one you just raked over the coals. The end result is a deleted story and a writer whose career was snuffed out before it could begin.

And the moment their work reached a usable stage—the moment society was ready to accept plastic gender, and scientists were ready to manipulate it—the military found a new resource. Armed with functional connectome mapping and neural plastics, the military can make gender tactical.

Poor Isabel Fall. All she wanted to do was write a good, solid science fiction story that does what science fiction does best: concretalise metaphors to reflect the world around you. She succeeded, but at what cost to herself?

Movie log June

Thought it might be interesting to keep track of what I’ve been watching recently. Might have been inspired by Ian Sales.

The Matrix.
Twenty years on and with both the Wachowskis having come out in the meantime, it’s hard not to notice the trans subtext in this movie where Keanu Reeves discovers he is not who he thinks he is. Being ‘redpilled’ may have become a fascist meme, but the original is blatantly queer in intent. Been given the choice to either lead a ‘straight life’ or risk being murdered, how much more blatant can you get. Neo and Trinity murdering dozens of police and soldiers and nobody bats an eyelid; an insurrection against the entire late capitalist world, led by a Black man; Agent Smith explaining that this world is the best humanity can imagine… For a Hollywood action movie it sure is incendiary.

Welt am Draht.
Now imagine The Matrix, but made as a two part movie for the West-German television, in 1973 and directed by Rainer Werner Fassbinder. All seventies lushness, focusing on psychology rather than action, but with the same obsession of this world not being real. This time however the protagonist is in charge of the simulated world, rather than a victim of it. Fortyseven years on you can probably guess the plot twists, but that did not make it any less interesting.

Die große Ekstase des Bildschnitzers Steiner.
Staying in Germany, this is an early Werner Herzog documentary for West-German television. It follows Walter Steiner, champion ski-jumper, during the 1973/74 season. Slow and calm, leaving plenty of room for Steiner to talk, this was an ideal Sunday morning movie. Herzog is not shy to put himself in front of the camera, to explain the difficulties and technicalities of making this documentary.

How Much Wood Would a Woodchuck Chuck: Beobachtungen zu einer neuen Sprache.
Herzog again, documenting the World Livestock Auctioneer Championship in Pennsylvania. At one point late in the programme, he confesses being frightened of this language created out of commerce. This may the most seventies observation ever. This is the sort of judgementality I can get behind. Nevertheless, Herzog leaves the auctioneers their dignity, observes but doesn’t challenge.

Magical Mystery Tour.
The Beatles made some pretentious shite, didn’t they? A Sunday afternoon movie for a time when there were only two channels and the other side had sheep herding. But it does feature the Bonzo Dog Band doing Death Cab for Cutie while sharing the stage with a stripper.

The Godfathers of Hardcore.
A portrait of Roger Miret and Vinnie Stigma of Agnostic Front. Hardcore pioneers turned almost respectable and middle aged. If you know the band this is a good movie, otherwise it’s a standard band documentary.

Flowers of Taipei: Taiwan New Cinema
Has an interesting setup, spiraling in on to its subject. It moves from movie critics and makers in Europe — Paris and Rotterdam, moving to Buenos Aires, Tokyo, Hong Kong and mainland China, then finally Taiwan itself. As I watched this, I found myself fascinated with the light both in the movie extracts and the documentary pieces. All very soft, very mellow. It suffers a bit from assuming that you already have some notion of Taiwan cinema of the eighties and the directors mentioned, with Wikipedia being no help. But it succeeds in making want to see these movies, which is what matters most.

Pick It Up! – Ska in the ’90s.
Third wave ska is mostly a joke now, yet ever since Smash Mouth has become semirespectable to like again, a revival can’t be far away. This docu provides a broad overview of the birth of ska, how it got to the US by the way of 2-Tone in the UK and how it got massive almost by accident. I’ve always liked ska, but not listened much to this flavour of it. Maybe I should.

Se ying diu sau.
Jackie Chan is a walking punching bag for a mediocre kung-fu school. One day he rescues an old man from a rival school and he turns out to be the last surviving teacher of the Snake Fist, being hunted by the Eagle Claw school. The old man teaches Jackie his fighting style and he improves upon it after being inspired by his cat. A plot largely there only to string the fight scenes along, all very entertaining and occassionally even funny. Jackie Chan pulls a lot of good painful faces and the fighting is fun.

She he ba bu.
A supposedly more serious Jackie Chan movie, in which he is the owner of an important kung fu manual every school wants their hands on. Searching for the man who attacked his master, he keeps getting into fights with people who want the book. Again, plot is there just to facilitate the fight scenes, but more so. Lacking the humour of the other film and with some choice bits of sexism on Chan’s part, this comes less recommended.

Long men kezhan.
A 1967 Taiwanese historical kung fu movie. Evil eunuchs plot to kill the children of an executed minister at an inn at the border. But the guests of the inn have other ideas. This has 0much more stylised ways of fighting than in the two Jackie Chan movies, with the emphasis on sword fighting rather than hand to hand combat. The atmosphere in this is great, as the various parties size each other up while everybody pretends everything is still normal. A lot of enemies recognising the talent in each other and being reluctant to fight therefore, always a favourite.

Welt Am Draht — Sci-Fi Sundaze

Welt Am Draht is basically what you get if you imagine The Matrix done in 1973, directed by a German auteur director more interested in philosophy than action and made as a two part television movie for a West German television channel.



How can you know the impact of a movie like this, fortyseven years after the fact and with its own remake having come out in the same year as The Matrix, itself already twentyone years old? I’m sure you can guess the core idea of this movie just from me having compared it to The Matrix. And yes, this is a movie about reality as a simulation, and yes that is the big reveal at the middle of it. But that television audience which sat down to watch it that October night in 1973, what would they have made of it? Was this intended to have been a surprise, or something that you were expected to have deduced from the hints the movie dropped, long before the protagonist did?

Wehlt am Draht: gorgeous office sets

Another thing difficult to judge: the set dressing. This is a gorgeous office, sumptuous in its “seventies retrofuturism” as the Criterion trailer has it. But would you have seen it that way had you watched it in 1973, when all this would be far more the stuff of everyday life, or was this absurd even for 1973? Certainly the outsized ties our protagonist wears wouldn’t have been that ludicrous in their original context as they seem now. In any case throughout the movie I found myself admiring the sets and cinematography as much as I followed the plot. It is all so incredibly lush, so rich. As such it slots in neatly with the seventies science fiction cinema boom of big budget, big sets movies. But unlike some, it has more going for it than that.

Wehlt am Draht: sterile clutter

The director, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, was one of the giants of West-German cinema; this is his only science fiction movie. It’s interesting how he manages to avoid the pitfalls of science fiction movie making that so many contemporary movies fell into. Set in the present day, present time, it has no outlandish costuming (those flared ties notwithstanding) nor much easily dated sci-fi gadgetry. It doesn’t waste time and credibility explaining how its central conceit works, but rather focuses on working through its implications. If we’re capable of creating a computer simulation that is so realistic that its inhabitants never suspect that they are living in one, who is to say we ourselves are not living in one too?

Wehlt am Draht: mirrored images

Welt Am Draht is a slow, slow movie. As said, it takes its protagonist an hour and a half of the movie to get the realisation that indeed he’s not living in any real world. That’s almost the same running time as The Thirteenth Floor its remake and it still has two hours more to run. But while it is slow, it never feels slow, because it uses its running time to throroughly consider that idea of living in a simulation, what it would mean to discover that you do so. Though it flirts with the traditional idea of that sort of revelation driving you mad, it never quite gets there. It even has a happy ending.

Wehlt am Draht: watching the watchers

Welt Am Draht ends with the protagonist’s escape from his simulacrum to what’s presumably the real world. The problem of the simulacrum remains unsolved, its philosophical questions swapped for a more mundane love affair. With no real catharsis, this is an unsettling movie, much more so than most of the other movies mining the same vein of technopessimism and paranoia that came out at the same time. Because it’s set in a world that’s recognisably our contemporary world, the feeling of alienation brought on by the high modernist clutter in the otherwise sterile office landscape it mostly takes part in, works so well. Because it keeps the futuristic to a minimum, the distortions caused by it hit all the harder when it is introduced.

Wehlt am Draht: glitches in the matrix

The use of mirrors and other reflecting surfaces by Fassbinder to shoot his characters in, the extraordinary stillness of the supporting cast in crowd scenes until called into action by the script, the way the protagonist constantly keeps moving, a discordant note among the rest of the cast, it all adds to this alienation. Especially those opening minutes made me uncomfortable watching, the thought kept nagging that something was wrong with this world, without ever knowing why. The repeated use of cabaret, with all its intonations of queerness, just reinforced this feeling. What it reminded me of was not so much The Matrix, but rather Videodrome, whic is similarly unsettling. It is very much a movie you would need to see if you like the latter.

On new music

What do we mean when we talk about listening to new music? I’m currently listening to the album the song below was taken off, ABC’s 1987 comeback attempt, Alphabet City. I do have the vinyl of that, but this is the first time I’ve listened to it in decades. Arguable this is new music to me, but is it?



Probably not, eh? But I have never listened to ABC’s sophomore album, Beauty Stab. When I play it today, does that mean I’m listening to new music, or is there more to it? The idea after all is that you stop listening to new music after a certain age (thirty, thirtyfive, in any case an age I passed a while ago). You no longer have the mental flexibility to appreciate new things, and are forever doomed to wallow in the nostalgia of the music of your youth. A horrible fate.

But what does count as listening to new music? Ont he one hand Beauty Stab is new music for me. On the other hand it’s more of the same music from a band I already know I like. Not very adventurous. But what if you discover an overlooked artist or group in the same genre of pop music? Is that new music? Or does that still fall under nostalgic wallowing? Surely discovering an entire new (sub)genre of music does count, right?



Alcest is a French band/project driven by metal prodigy Neige, which with its first EP created a new genre: blackgaze. A hideous mutant recombination of black metal and shoegaze and I’d be surprised if you can find two more unlikely musical genres to merge. Nevertheless it’s ultimately still heavy metal, a music genre I’m well familiar with. Alcest sounds a lot different from the Iron Maiden and Anthrax I grew up with, but ultimately it’s still metal. And to be honest, it is rare for me to start listening to any kind of music that is completely alien to me. Getting into Japanese pop and rock music by way of anime was the last major discovery for me, but even that is not that alien.



Ironically, the newest sort of music I may have listened to recently is actually the oldest piece of music we know how to play, a hymn to Nikkal, the goddes of orchards and fertility from Ugarit, an ancient port city in what is now Syria. Almost 3500 years old, it’s oldest discovered song with surviving musical notation. It’s older than anything we know, a product from an almost alien world, yet put a synth under it or use the right sort of guitar and it could just as well be a modern noise or gothic song.