Mock up on Mu - Based around 1950's Occult circles in Cali
A radical hybrid of sci-fi, spy, Western and even horror genres, Craig Baldwin's "Mock Up On Mu" cobbles together a feature-length "collage-narrative" based on (mostly) true stories of California's post-war sub-cultures of rocket pioneers, alternative religions and beat lifestyles. Pulp-serial snippets, industrial-film imagery, and clips are intercut with newly shot live-action material, powering a playful, allegorical trajectory through the now-mythic occult matrix of Jack Parsons (Crowleyite founder of the Jet Propulsion Lab), L. Ron Hubbard (sci-fi author turned cult-leader), and Marjorie Cameron (bohemian artist and "mother of the New Age movement"). Their intertwined tales spin out into a speculative farce on the militarization of space, and the corporate take-over of spiritual fulfillment and leisure-time.
Guest appearance from Aleister Crowley also.
Ah, so it's a film.
I had the opportunity to see an early screening of this film a couple of years(?) ago. I found it to be highly enjoyable. Craig Baldwin was a blast to hear interviewed as well.
I found a review for this online and searched to see if it was on Lashtal already. Since it is I'll post a link to the review.
Has anyone else here seen this. I'm considering ordering it.
As I said above, I saw a rough cut of this a couple of years ago. I really enjoyed it. I'm looking forward to seeing the final cut.
I don't know. sounds like the usual hollywad left wing political bullshit to me. Crowley & Satanic Space corporations bad. Hippies and Agrarian non-acheivement tetnaus good.
Seems worth watching (at least once) to me.
I saw this film earlier in the year along with a Q. and A. with Craig Baldwin in person.
It is a mixture of old movie clips (lots of sci-fi etc)/found footage with actors/the directors friends playing various roles including someone playing A.C. (looks nowt like him!)
Its good fun, but has a lot of homage to b-movies in both content and style/production values, so if you are looking for a serious analysis then its not for you. But it (and Baldwin) are both oddities so thats a good thing. However I dont feel the need to see it again.