The Chinatown Death Cloud Peril is Paul Malmont's first novel and, (as first novels go) this manuscript is a strong contender.

Malmont is an avid fan of the Pulp Fiction Era, and The Chinatown Death Cloud Peril is his salute to the writers of that period. Although Jules Verne had begun writing science fiction novels a century before, and his work had later been reinforced by classical sci fi writers like Mary Shelley and H. G. Wells, the field of speculative fiction was still in its infancy. So the stories from this era (specifically the 1930s and '40s) were (for the most part, at least) stylized tales of epic adventure, replete with insidious villains and nefarious plots, sultry damsels forever in distress, and larger than life heroes, always ready to save the day..

Produced in a magazine format (like the comic books that would eventually supplant them) pulps were sold at newsstands all around the country. Their covers were often lurid and provocative, so as to beguile the consumer into purchasing them. While such covers were a boon to sales, at the same time they also detracted from public acceptance of this form of speculative fiction; 'decent folk' of the '30s and '40s were outraged by many of the scenes they depicted (seems like some things never change, eh?). Made as cheaply as possible, to minimize investment and maximize profit, today only a few copies of these magazines still exist. Sadly, most of them have crumbled to dust by now..

Paul Malmont's novel, true the genre it is saluting, contains all the best elements of the pulp era classics. Action, adventure, Lovecraftian horror, rugged (and not so rugged) heroes, a veritable host of badguys, alluring damsels in distress, an enough plot twists to keep the reader guessing right up until the last page. Combine that with solid writing and pacing, flavored with a pinch of the tough, hard bitten style for which this period was so well known, and you'll have all the ingredients you need for making this tale what it truly is-a worthy salute (and successor) to the era which it chooses to emulate..

Perhaps one of the most intriguing devices Malmont uses in this tale is that of making the writers the heroes. In The Chinatown Death Cloud Peril renowned storytellers of that bygone age such as Lester Dent, author of the Doc Savage series, Walter Gibson, creator of The Shadow, L. Ron Hubbard, science fiction author and founder of Scientology, and even H. P. Lovecraft, acknowledged master of early twentieth century horror, are all to be found roaming these pages (and a few surprise guests, as well). As the story develops, the writers gradually become reflections of their characters. (Which is, of course, exactly the opposite of the way that the story usually goes-characters are a reflection, or a facet, of their creators.) Malmont handles this particular device quite well, and none of this comes over as the slightest bit trite or contrived. The transitions are very smoothly executed, and the author shows a great deal of restraint when he performs them; reflections they maybe, but they are only brief flashes that appear, and then just as quickly fade..

If you're a fan of the Pulp Fiction Era, you probably already have this book (or you left halfway through the last paragraph to snag yourself a copy). If not, then you don't know what you're missing. The Chinatown Death Cloud Peril is a strong first novel for author Paul Malmont, and a darn good story, to boot! Check it out and see if you agree.

(Spoiler Alert: This article contains references to specific incidents in the story. If you haven't seen and/or read this story yet, you may want to hold off reading this until you do.)

It should be noted right up front that of the two major films made about this novel, the second one, a mini-series starring Steven Weber and Rebecca DeMornay, captures more of the feel of the original story. If you've read the book, and want to see it realized on the big (or little) screen, then the mini-series is probably your best bet. The Stanley Kubrick version is more an impressionistic piece, rather than a word for word retelling of King's story. And yet, it's been Stanley Kubrick's version of The Shining that has garnered the most critical acclaim, and it's also the Kubrick version that has produced so many of the iconic images which the general public has come to associate with this story.

Why the disparity between these two treatments of the same subject; especially when the mini-series is a more accurate recounting of the tale? Wags will say (okay kids, shout it out) Jack Nicholson, but the truth is that while Steven Weber may not have the kind of clout that Nicholson does, he is still an accomplished actor in his own right, and is quite capable of creating his own iconic images (check out his dead man's pose in Hamburger Hill). No, the real answer is simpler, and yet at the same time it is much more complex: Stanley Kubrick.

Just a partial list of Kubrick's movies is like a who's who of latter twentieth century classical film: Doctor Strangelove, Spartacus, 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket, and, of course, The Shining. Even the most casual perusal of the aforementioned titles will give the reader some idea of this director's versatility. Most Hollywood directors are associated with certain types of films, and yet Kubrick chose not to concentrate on any particular field of moviemaking. Instead, each one of his films was an experiment in a different type and style of storytelling. Kubrick's willingness to delve into a variety of movie genres, and the courage he showed in doing so, is (part of) what makes his work so unique.

This facet of Kubrick's multi-layered approach to filmmaking is quite evident in his treatment of The Shining. Rather than making a simple horror film, he chose to explore the roots of horror itself. Why do such movies scare us? And what are we really scared of?

Kubrick parades various elements of horror in front of his audience: a looming gothic edifice, a sense of isolation, tales of murder and mayhem, ghostly visitations, a cackling crone, torrents of blood, and a descent into madness. And then, he proceeds to illustrate to the viewer the genesis of their fears.

Near the end of the film, as Wendy stumbles through the vast maze-like corridors of the hotel, she encounters a series of malevolent apparitions, each one more bizarre and terrifying than the last. But her most heartrending shock comes when she chances upon the freshly murdered corpse of Halloran, prostrate on the lobby floor.

Death is what we fear, then, Kubrick says. Death is at the heart of all horror. And yet death is just another facet of life, isn't it? And while the prospect may seem intimidating to some, we have philosophy, religion, and science to give us comfort. Ultimately, there must be more to it than just the fear of death, right?

And there is, of course, as Kubrick shows the viewer in one of the closing scenes of the film.

As Jack lifts the bloody axe up over his head and rages incoherently, now no longer a man but merely a vessel for the dark, malignant force that is the Overlook Hotel, Kubrick presents the viewer with the true origin of all horror. It is a man, bereft of all conscience, of all social and morale constraints, bent on violence, on murder most foul. Here, then, is what we truly fear. This is the boogieman, the thing in the closet, the creature under the bed. A real monster, more deadly and terrifying than anything our imaginations can ever supply.

The word visionary gets tossed around a lot. So much so, that after a while it ceases to mean anything. But the bottom line is that this man was a true visionary. Stanley Kubrick was a director's director. Check out his The Shining and see if you agree.

Didn't find what you're looking for?

Browse our past issues!  Visit... Table of Contents Issue 1 Issue 2 Issue 3 Issue 4 Issue 5 Issue 6 Issue 7 Issue 8 Issue 9 Issue 10 Issue 11 Current Issue

Table of Contents