10 Spec Fic Novels that Have Altered the Landscape

 Recently, a Facebook friend posted a Polygon article titled, "15 Most Recent Sci Fi Novels that Forever Shaped the Genre." As usual, I disagreed with the choices. In fact I'd only started reading two of the fifteen, and neither of those compelled me to finish them. So, I decided to write my own list, which ironically includes one of the authors on Polygon's but an entirely different novel.

Mastai's debut novel covers a topic rarely, if ever, seen in science fiction these days: The Utopian future. More to the point, how easily one selfish, angry person can cause a reverse Butterfly Effect that destroys the optimistic future correctly (in this novel's conceit, anyway) predicted in all the pulp magazines and "Jetsons" episodes of the past. Mastai balances human relationships and larger sci-fi concepts beautifully without one ever over-shadowing the other.

If there's one thing there's no shortage of in science fiction written by Gen X and Millienal males, it's daddy issues. Also, meta-fiction doesn't always receive the credit it deserves in our self-aware, cynical era. If you want to read novels about time travelers trying to fix the past, this ain't one of them. Our protagonist actually kills himself when he sees himself emerging from a time machine, thus setting off a chain of fascinating ideas.

Neuvel swiftly became one of my favorite authors with his "Themis Files" trilogy concerning recently unearthed giant statues that are more than they seem. The author's manipulation of structure and form are far more palatable than what's to be found in the work of Mark Z. Danielwski because it serves the plot rather than it being the point of the novel. Neuvel's approach shouldn't work, making it all the more glorious to experience. 

 The prevailing wisdom when it comes to alternate history fiction these days is, if you're going to write it, make it big. From a United States perspective, it doesn't get much bigger than a modern era where slavery never ended. Winters presents a future where slavery's enduring presence permeates all parts of American society, especially corporate America. In fact, the ending  is easily up there with "Soylent Green" in its horrifying yet utterly believable revelation.

 "Who Fears Death" is one of those novels that challenges the genre status quo in all the best ways. Featuring a young Nigerian girl-later-woman as its protagonist, taking place in Africa (Sudan, to be exact) and written by someone of Nigerian descent, it is quite literally not the novels of the Grandmasters of Science Fiction. It is a refreshing boost to a stagnating genre and its mixture of cultural richness, fascinating speculation and unexpected moments make it a genuine experience. Even though there is so-called sorcery involved, it is the result of genetic manipulation. Okorafor has chased this story's greatness several times since with novels that unfortunately feel like imitations of its brilliance, but this one and its prequel "The Book of Phoenix" are the ones to read.

 

 No novel receives short shrift more than David Wong's (real name Jason Pargin) "John Dies at the End" because, frankly, I'm not sure readers older than Generation X know what to make of it. It is meta as all hell, it self-references like crazy, and it transgresses all of the known tropes by creating new ones to also transgress. Never has there been a tale of inter-dimensional monster hunters rooted so firmly in gritty reality. 

Sometimes the best science fiction is written by authors who aren't necessarily fans of the genre. "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" comes to mind. Mullen's novel, second in quality only to his "The Many Deaths of the Firefly Brothers," concerns a perfect future of a different sort than the one found in "All Our Wrong Todays." In this future, history is considered so sacred that the average person cannot know about it for fear of repeating the mistakes of the past. There is no hunger or poverty or war, but nobody knows who they are or where they came from. Naturally, there is a group hellbent on altering the past and it's up to Zed to stop them, no matter how horrible the events are. 

Whenever an author can take the wackiest conspiracy theories believed by our fellow human and work them into a disturbingly plausible novel, it's worth pointing out. Brilliantly using a missing person case as the springboard for all the craziness yet to be experiences, Renner somehow weaves dementia and humanity's capacity for massive self-destruction into something truly awe-inspiring and terrifying. Novels this ambitious are often a mixed bag, especially when they only clock in at 300+ pages, but "The Great Forgetting" isn't one to...here it comes...ever be forgotten!

Without fear of hyperbole, Claire North (real name Catherine Webb) may well be the most brilliant and talented author of speculative fiction to come along in a generation. Each of her novels displays a level of talent that fill me with equal parts awe and envy. In this novel, the concept of time travel is upended by the reality of reincarnation that, in itself, is more a form of tribal memory that an actual return to life. The tale is riveting and all-too human and North writes with a literary urgency that feels meticulous rather than rushed. 

Unlike Max Brook's "World War Z," the multiple narrator approach in Wilson's novel never wears out its welcome or feels gimmicky. Perhaps that's because robotics is a real thing and Wilson has a PhD in it. There's an authenticity to the proceedings and a logic involved in what's happening that makes all of the shifting perspectives feel entirely natural. Without this novel, it's doubtful "Sleeping Giants" would have been as well-received.

2nd (and probably last) Patreon Post for September.

This post is fiction. Honestly. Not a word of it is based in any way on the tormented hell that is my life. 

Become a patron blah blah blah click here to read it yadda yadda yadda...

Avengers: Endgame, a Response in List Form.

It has now been four months since I sat in a darkened theater with a fellow comic fan and watched the film both of us had been eagerly and giddily anticipating for a year. Having both become equally obsessed with the previous "Avengers: Infinity War," a movie we both watched over and over in anticipation of an epic conclusion, our excitement could not have reached a higher fever pitch.

The film, clocking in at just over three hours, set out to bring an open-ended conclusion to eleven years worth of interconnected storytelling in one massive, never-before-done cinematic achievement. When it was over, we left the theater in silence, walking past a long line of moviegoers who had come for the next showing. It wasn't until we got in the car that I spoke first.

Sighing, I said, "Y'know. I don't know that I liked it."

"Me neither," he said.

And with that dual admission, I felt my soul sink into a strange sadness that did not let up for two months.

I won't go into my feelings too much in this post but I will admit to feeling incredibly letdown. Predictably, the early reactions to the film were glowing and positive, but once the "feels" wore off, more people started sounding like me. And, of course, they were attacked for it. It was "The Dark Knight" all over again, except perhaps a bit less psychotic. I touched on that portion here.

My movie buddy, who has not seen the movie a second time, has settled into a bit of spin doctoring, where he insists the movie was always expected to be what we saw. Maybe, but that doesn't mean it should have been. That doesn't mean we should excuse lazy writing and arrogant presumption on the part of the filmmakers and, in particular, the screenwriters.

That's why, now that I have what I feel is sufficient emotional distance, I can now list my issues with the film in detail based on my criteria for successful drama.

TONE: One would have to be insane or utterly clueless to expect this movie to maintain the tone of "Infinity War." This is a film about the aftermath of its predecessor's events. The tone should be more somber, more serious and, sadly, less entertaining. That last point isn't a fault of the filmmakers, it's a necessity based on the story. So, the tone of the film is appropriate and mostly effective.

PLOT: Not to be confused with the next point, the movie's plot is a bit of a mess. That would be okay with a stronger story, but in this case there are far too many contrivances and very little realized potential. To start, the idea that the events of the previous movie aren't easily repaired sound great until you realize the plot involves the heroes easily repairing the events of the previous movie. Once the initial, relatively interesting world-building takes place, the film's plot merely dumps the viewer from one uninspired set to another all so it can end with a big battle sequence. The various character sub-plots such as "Fat Thor" and his PTSD (Marvel really seems to think trauma is good for a few laughs) and Professor Hulk definitely have their negative aspects but they don't ruin the overall plot.

STORY: The filmmakers had one job: Maintain the quality of "Infinity War" while telling a different kind of story in the sequel. Due to several questionable story element choices, they failed. How did they fail? For one thing, they got lazy. Time travel to the past is just about the most tiresome trope in science fiction these days and this film embraces it like a lost lover. Of all the alternative solutions to the problem our heroes faced (I came up with five without even thinking hard) time travel was what the writers settled on? I say "settled on" because I want to believe they're smart enough to have considered other options before using one any first semester hack could have come up with. As mentioned in the "Plot" section, "Endgame" moves from one lackluster location to another because the story dictates time hopping. And since the easiest way to get people to like you these days appears to involve turning up the nostalgia meter to eleven, the second hour of the film involves one previously seen location or scene after another until it feels as if this is not so much a sequel as a greatest hits collection. The earlier promising setup of a trip into the Quantum Realm heralded by Antman's return thanks to a rat is abandoned in favor of one of the most interminable hours in MCU history.  That brings me to the next point,

PACING: Oy vey. Sluggish in places, "Endgame" was never supposed to be the pulse-pounding actioner that "Infinity War" was. But the pace never seems to pick up even when the big battle is happening. The part where present-day Thanos is found is over before it starts, plunging the remainder of the film into sloth-like discussion scenes and supposedly touching moments such as Tony Stark's experience in 1970. Unlike "Infinity War," this movie feels like every single one of its 180 minutes.

ACTING: The MCU actors know their roles and play them well. If they seem less present this time, it feels more like an editing issue than a performance one. Although I'd be lying if I didn't admit that Downey seems tired and ready to move on. Interestingly, Paul Rudd's performance is the most dynamic this time, maybe because they gave me him more to do. Josh Brolin, who turned in a phenomenal performance last time around, seems lethargic and bored now.

DIRECTION/EDITING: The Russo Brothers are hit and miss for me. They seem to observe the so-called "Star Trek" rule where every other film is good. This time around they do a fine job but nothing stands out. The editing, however, is where my friend I agreed the major issues with "Endgame" are to be found. Scenes that should be shorter are far too long and scenes that needed to be longer are over much too quickly.

ACTION: Well, there isn't much. Most of the film consists of long stretches of would-be witty dialogue and discussing the plot as if we the viewers forgot it after five minutes. Action gives way to suspense in this installment, which is perfectly fine. There was no way they were going to top what was done in "Infinity War." The problem is, the only real suspense takes place in small pockets rather than a continuing thread and by the time the movie really decides to become full-on suspenseful, it gives way to the required big battle scene. And that scene, which is admittedly well-staged and executed, feels old hat after the less choreographed scenes in the previous film. It still thrills but there was a sense of "Okay, let's get this part over with" when I watched it.

DIALOGUE: "Infinity War" is so quotable. So were the first two Avengers films. But other than a couple lines of dialogue here and there, "Endgame's" dialogue is rather run of the mill. Even the one-liners for which the MCU has unfortunately become synonymous are pretty stale and lame this time around. One longs for Joss Whedon's self-indulgent yet witty dialogue writing.

I know this all sounds like I hated the movie. I didn't. It was entertaining. Had it been a stand-alone film I might have enjoyed it more, but it wasn't and it had a lot more to live up to than that. The filmmakers played it far too safe with the writing aspect. Killing off some beloved characters who aren't coming back in real life is not a substitute for risk-taking. And the strength of the overall story arc makes even a misstep like this, much like the stunningly  mediocre "Captain Marvel" still worth watching.

But I have learned to not let near perfection cause me to assume the follow-up will be just as good but in a different way, 'Nuff said.