Gary Westfahl's Biographical Encyclopedia of Science Fiction Film

Written by James Russell
Published December 13, 2002

When approaching Gary Westfahl's online SF resource, the key thing to remember is that it's described as a work in progress. This is the only thing excusing the absence of an entry for Georges Melies, who arguably invented the SF film to begin with. With that in mind, let us proceed.

Westfahl's avowed inspiration for his own text is David Thomson's Biographical Dictionary of Film, both in its insistence that while film-making is collaborative in nature, it remains the work of identifiable individual talents, and in its insistence that the author's opinions about his subject should be stated boldly and clearly. Westfahl inarguably meets the latter of those conditions immediately, saying of Thomson himself:

regardless of his other virtues, Thomson happens to be consistently wrongheaded on those rare occasions when he considers science fiction films (I mean, the man prefers Metropolis to 2001: A Space Odyssey, for heaven's sake.)

Regrettably Westfahl has entries for neither Fritz Lang nor Stanley Kubrick to demonstrate exactly why this is so wrongheaded of Thomson. I like both Metropolis and 2001, though I do prefer the latter to the former. Then again, I like 2001 better than many other films too. Anyway.

Westfahl seems to have gone online with his text primarily for the simple reason that he seems to have been unable to obtain a print publisher. Curious, since as he notes his book is pretty much unique, and you'd expect a publisher would be keen to pick up a book like that (odder still when you see how specialised some SF reference books can be). Still, the online format has its uses. Primarily it allows the liberty of adding to the text incrementally, and Westfahl promises to add a couple of entries per month. (I estimate, therefore, that he should be finished circa 2014 at his present rate, since he claims to have drawn up credits for 400 individuals before starting and currently has nearly ninety complete entries. That's assuming he doesn't add any more over the next decade, either, else he might never finish.)

The incomplete text that exists, then, is a strangely haphazard one. A number of key figures are missing (we might also wonder at the absence of Leonard Nimoy when his Star Trek compatriots William Shatner and George Takei are here), while a number of personages that could be called peripheral at best are present (The Beatles, Ben Hecht and Anthony Quinn, anyone?). Would it not have made more sense to start with the more commonly recognised "important" figures and add the secondary ones later? Why does a non-entity like Frederic Gadette merit being written about before Fritz Lang does?

Unfortunately, too, the reader may feel (as I do) that Westfahl's negative judgements stand out in the memory more than his positive ones. Examples:

Nick Adams: "...once you link together the phrases 'handsome young actor,' 'absolutely no talent,' and 'briefly famous,' it is almost inevitable that 'recurring star of bad science fiction movies' will be added to the string."
Gerry Anderson: "If the nations of the world ever decide to stage Nurenberg Trials to punish the makers of bad science fiction film, Gerry Anderson will be the first defendant."
Tim Burton: "Sorry, you're not paying me enough money to figure out Tim Burton."
John Carradine: "...he displayed no real appreciation for the genuinely unknown or genuinely unearthly; rather, he tried to convey the strange and terrifying only with a tired repertoire of acting tricks."
Lon Chaney Jr.: "Lon Chaney, Jr. never gave a good performance in a horror or science fiction film. With his extremely limited talents, the only roles he could really play were ordinary people--as in the westerns that he came to prefer--or less than ordinary people--like Lenny in Of Mice and Men (1939), his only competent portrayal."
Louise Fletcher: "...she is at her best only when she is playing a bad actress."
Lorne Greene: "...acting in science fiction films generally demands a modicum of intelligence, and if that intelligence wasn't in the script, Greene couldn't, or wouldn't, provide it."
Nathan Juran: "...if you're planning a revival-house double feature to punish your worst enemy, you should seriously consider Attack of the Fifty-Foot Woman and The Brain from Planet Arous."
Glen A. Larson: "...no business other than the entertainment industry would ever be so irrational as to allow a proven incompetent like Glen A. Larson to keep churning out his trademark mistakes."
Christopher Lee: "...always acts in an utterly joyless manner, displaying absolutely no pleasure or interest in what he is doing."
George Pal: "...when it came to science fiction film, George Pal just didn't get it."
Keanu Reeves: "...one of those rare performers who keeps getting worse and worse as his career progresses."
Roy Scheider: "No one told Scheider that understatement is one key to successful film acting."
Steven Spielberg: "...an insufferably awful director and a pernicious influence on the entire genre."
George Takei: "George Takei is such a nice man--so unfailingly friendly and accessible to Star Trek fans, so consistently supportive of Asian-American performers and causes--that it really is such a shame to report that he is such an awful actor, probably the least talented regular in any of the Star Trek series."
Peter Ustinov: "Accounts of Sir Peter Ustinov's life always emphasize how many different roles he has played... They are too kind to point out that he didn't do any of these things particularly well."
Edward D. Wood Jr.: "Someday, western civilization may mature to the stage where people realize that it is not polite to stare intently or giggle at crippled movies."

page 1 | 2 | 3
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Gary Westfahl's Biographical Encyclopedia of Science Fiction Film
Published: December 13, 2002
Type:
Section: Video
Filed Under: Video: SF
Writer: James Russell
James Russell's BC Writer page
James Russell's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by James Russell
Video: SF
All Video Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — September 21, 2005 @ 23:55PM — james cole

I recently came across the website for Gary Westfahl's "book" in the making, and thought it was the worst idea- if you hate science fiction why write about it?
In his attack on Space 1999 (surprised?) he states that the mooon travels each week past a new planet, which is an idiotic idea to him. Except this never happened in the show! The moon did travel past several planets and into a couple blak holes and worm holes, but not a new system each week as he stated. If you want to be accepted as a credible writer you shouldnt have to make up things that are false. Space 1999 aside from star trek, has had a huge influence on the genre in the last 2 decades, like it or not. How could he possibly have any thing good to say about 2001, but not 1999? The above writer does a good job pointing out the massive failure of mr. westfahls' book-no wonder it will not get published. Why write about a subject you don't understand?

#2 — October 9, 2005 @ 01:20AM — Tom Gander

Lon Chaney, Jr. did a great job in Spider Baby.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/2248)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments