HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: edgar@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Sick of DECKARD!!!!!
Date: 16 Dec 1992 14:38:19 -0500
Organization: The Ohio State University, Dept. of Math.
NNTP-Posting-Host: function.mps.ohio-state.edu


Deckard will be played by Macaulay Culkin in the sequel...



(sorry)



-- 
  Gerald A. Edgar                Internet:  edgar@mps.ohio-state.edu
  Department of Mathematics      Bitnet:    EDGAR@OHSTPY
  The Ohio State University      telephone: 614-292-0395 (Office)
  Columbus, OH 43210             -292-4975 (Math. Dept.) -292-1479 (Dept. Fax)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com>
Subject: unrealistic space scenes
Reply-To: "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 14 Dec 92 08:43:47 EST

Please find that "handbook of interstellar travel" and post its title
here. I think a lot of us would benefit from a little physics, even if
it's theoretical...

Take care

Robert
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: slb3y@cc.usu.edu (Punk Rocketeer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Unrealistic space scenes
Date: 14 Dec 92 14:15:09 MDT
Organization: Omega:  The Final Solution

In article <1992Dec9.193652.1@vax1.umkc.edu>, kgassner@vax1.umkc.edu writes:
> 4. Standard weapon is something with very short range, that fires tracers
>    and is aimed by hand.
>    Again, those weapons have fancy names but perform like a machinegun or
>    AA-Gun with tracer ammution, because that's what inspired Lucas. The range
>    of a laser in space is virtually unlimited and most modern weapons do better
>    than that supposedly High-tech stuff. This and the total lack of computer
>    assisted aiming and fire controls is somewhat unrealistic, but is good for
>    the plot and makes nicer movie shots. 

     After watching ROTJ again last night, I have to disagree.  Modern
weapons are clearly inferior.  Han Solo's blaster pistol penetrates
Imperial stormtrooper armor without even scratching the white paint. 
No scorch marks, no holes, nothing, yet the trooper dies.  The same
thing seems to be true of all Rebel blasters.  Maybe they've developed
something that completely bypasses IS armor but damages the underlying
flesh.  Or maybe IS armor acts as a power boost/focussing agent for
blaster bolts.
-- 
Patrick S. Clark | "O come let us adore them.
Email is life!   |  We've quit our day jobs for them."
Usual disclaimer | from "O Come All Ye Grateful Deadheads"
This .sig brought to you in part by the Bob Rivers Comedy Corp.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jdunning@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (John Alan Dunning)
Subject: Re: T2 wish list.
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 13:53:17 GMT

In article <STEINARB.92Dec12161532@tindved.idt.unit.no> steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang) writes:
>Voice-overs should be unnecessary. You should be able to explain
>everything with pictures. I was embarrased by the voice-overs in
>"Blade Runner" and embarrased by the voice-overs in T2.
>
>I like Harrison Ford (Han Solo was one of my boyhood heroes. Stuff
>like that goes *deep*...) and I *really* like Linda Hamilton. That
>only made the embarrasment worse, however.

Harrison Ford didn't like the voice overs either.  But they were in
his contract, if the studio wanted them done.  Which they did, since
they thought the audience was too stupid to understand the movie
otherwise.  Some people thought Ford purposefully did a really poor 
job, hoping they wouldn't be used.

John
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:9469 rec.arts.movies:35667 alt.cult-movies:11350
From: bx916@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ross W. Starkey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: Star Trek:TMP alternate titles
Date: 18 Dec 1992 02:10:44 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bx916@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ross W. Starkey)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, teexijd@ioe.ac.uk (IAN DAVENPORT) says:

>In <1992Dec7.211805.13847@Virginia.EDU> qtm2w@Virginia.EDU ("Quinn T. McCord") writes:
>
>
>>	I have come across the following alternate titles for
>>Star Trek: The Motion Picture:

...lots of really good titles sent to the Q continuum...

>
>Star Trek: The Slow-Motion Picture ?

I second this!  It is a MUCH better picture when viewed while being
fast-forward-ed.

Of course viewing it that way, it only lasts for ten minutes....



>
>Ian J Davenport    MULLARD SPACE SCIENCE LABORATORY    ijd@uk.ac.ucl.mssl
>
>                "Replacement is the reverse of removal."
>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: dejesus@archimedes.nwc.navy.mil (Francisco X DeJesus)
Subject: Re: Higlander The Gathering
Organization: Science Applications International Corp.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:38:51 GMT

In article <Bz1JyF.G15@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> climiepd@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Delbert ( Peter Climie )) writes:
>On the video release of 'Kuffs' in the UK i saw a brief trailer
>which said "COMING SOON", "EXCLUSIVELY ON VIDEO", "HIGLANDER THE GATHERING"
>and then it had the picture from Highlander 2.
>
>
>What is this please ?

Maybe they're trying to "gather" together all the VHS copies of Highlander 2
so they can burn them and deny it ever happened! 8^)

"There can be only one!"
-- 
      Francisco X DeJesus  ----- S A I C -----  dejesus@chinalake.navy.mil
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  * disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are mine. Typos and errors are yours *
 "Duck Season!" "Rabbit Season!" "...rabbit season." "It's Duck Season! SHOOT!"
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:9415 rec.arts.movies:35478 alt.cult-movies:11285
From: bchurch@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Robert Church)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: SF Novels that would make Great Films
Date: 16 Dec 92 05:39:29 GMT
Organization: Ohio University School of Art. Athens

In article <1992Dec15.175740.62065@cc.usu.edu> slb3y@cc.usu.edu (Punk Rocketeer) writes:
>
>     You know, no one has yet brought up that throwing either Wesley
>Crusher or Macauley Culkin to wolves violates most cruelty to animal
>statutes.

Besides, there are all those blenders and microwaves just sitting around.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
From: roland@quadsys.com (Roland Besserer)
Subject: Re: SF Novels that would make Great Films
Organization: QUAD Systems
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:43:00 GMT

cew2w@Virginia.EDU (Christopher Edward Wrike) writes:
: 	Concerning Sci-Fi books that would make good movies,
: I don't think the Dirk Gently novels would make good
: movies.  The plots are incomprehensible and the books aren't
: that funny themselves.
:   	Does anyone out there think "Sphere" by
: Michael Crichton would be a good movie?  James Caan, Dana
: Delany, and Wesley Snipes in the leads?  Get Ridley Scott to
: direct?  I think it would be damn good.
: 	How about "Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card?  You know
: who you could get to star?
: 	MAUCALY CULKIN!!!!
: 

That's not even funny! Would make a great movie though - with the RIGHT
lead of course
-- 

Roland Besserer
QUAD Systems
roland@quadsys.com
From: opstad@Apple.COM (David Opstad)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: alien impressions
Date: 13 Dec 92 22:04:53 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

Upon seeing the subject of this thread, did anyone else think the same
thing I did? Namely, the alien doing impressions? The only instance I
could think of was the chest-burster doing its impression of Michigan
J. Frog singing "Hello my baby, hello my honey..." at the end of Spaceballs.

Or is all this just an impression I'm under...

Dave Opstad
Line Layout Weenie and Bad Movie Fan
From: uhschreg@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Ulrich Schreglmann)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Unrealistic space scenes
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:15:00 GMT
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen
NNTP-Posting-Host: faui03j.informatik.uni-erlangen.de

gallim@stsci.edu (Jack Gallimore,P254) writes:
>>>Anti-mater is a compact
>>>way to store fuel but expensive to produce.  Finding an anti-matter planet
>> 
>> And dangerous to store. A strong magnetic field would be the safest so-
>> lution. But the anti-matter has to be magnetic for that. And all you
>                                        ^^^^^^^^
>> need is still a very small high-velocity projectile to make the whole
>> thing some bomb.

>Magnetic?  I think you mean charged, or in a plasma state, 
>don't you?  Otherwise you could just stick it to
>a refrigerator and hold up pizza coupons.

The stuff has to be repelled, not attracted. And I was talking about
some chunk of solid matter, too massive to be held by electrostatics.
If it were some anti-iron, you could hold it floating if you made it
magnetic, and then burn atoms off with a laser. (But you shouldn't make
it hot enough too melt.  :-) )

>< Insert Sarcastic Smile here >

How 'bout this:

   v
}:-)
   ^

Looks great with my font.


Open Cooling Frequencies!

(C)OOL mcmxcii
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: cam@hawk.adied.oz.au (Cameron Newham)
Subject: Re: Sick of DECKARD!!!!!
Organization: Australian Defence Industries
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:42:03 GMT

cam@syzygy.DIALix.oz.au (Cameron Newham) writes:

>Geeeez!  Will you people knock it off!

>It's as bad as "the Biggs scene" !!!

>Look!  It doesn't matter if Deckard was a replicant or not!  It won't
>change the movie!

>cameron.

>ps: deckard isn't a replicant.



I agree!


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: kenl@origami.cc.bellcore.com (Ken Lehner)
Subject: Re: Unrealistic space scenes
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 21:26:16 GMT

In article <BzBGqK.Cqy.1@cs.cmu.edu>, nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes:
|> In article <1gijgjEINN8jo@uni-erlangen.de> uhschreg@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Ulrich Schreglmann) writes:
|> 
|>    You also can only move into one direction using sails: away from the
|>    sun. Sailing against the wind, like it's possible on the ocean isn't
|>    possible.
|> 
|> Cobblers. To fall towards the sun you angle the sail so that the net
|> force (which is perpendicular to the sail) reduces your orbital
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Isn't this only true in a medium such as air?  The perpendicular force is
due to lift generated by the passage of air around the sail (or other such
lifting body).  A sail in space could only provide force directly away
from the sun, no matter what the angle of said sail.

|> velocity. The World Space Foundation was intending to use a sail to
|> send a probe to Mercury, using this very technique.
|> 
|> Anyone wanting to know more spend some time over on sci.space. I'm
|> just passing through this newsgroup and I'm amazed at the amount of
|> unscientific nonsense that is spouted in an authoritative manner here.
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ahem.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner)
Subject: Re: Unrealistic space scenes
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 04:44:17 GMT

drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu (David Gutierrez) writes:

>In article <1992Dec14.141510.62034@cc.usu.edu> slb3y@cc.usu.edu (Punk
>Rocketeer) writes:
>>     After watching ROTJ again last night, I have to disagree.  Modern
>>weapons are clearly inferior.  Han Solo's blaster pistol penetrates
>>Imperial stormtrooper armor without even scratching the white paint. 
>>No scorch marks, no holes, nothing, yet the trooper dies.  The same
>>thing seems to be true of all Rebel blasters.  Maybe they've developed
>>something that completely bypasses IS armor but damages the underlying
>>flesh.  Or maybe IS armor acts as a power boost/focussing agent for
>>blaster bolts.

There are several scenes where small sparks/flames and smoke is produced when
a stormtrooper is shot.

>As I've pointed out before, that armor is probably made by the lowest bidder.

>David Gutierrez
>drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu

>"Only fools are positive." - Moe Howard
From: alien@acheron.amigans.gen.nz (Ross Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re:  Unrealistic space scenes
Date: 19 Dec 92 14:51:37 GMT+12
Distribution: world
Organization: Muppet Labs

In article <1992Dec15.212616.24305@walter.bellcore.com> kenl@origami.cc.bellcore.com (Ken Lehner) writes:
>In article <BzBGqK.Cqy.1@cs.cmu.edu>, nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes:
>|> In article <1gijgjEINN8jo@uni-erlangen.de> uhschreg@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Ulrich Schreglmann) writes:
>|>
>|>    You also can only move into one direction using sails: away from the
>|>    sun. Sailing against the wind, like it's possible on the ocean isn't
>|>    possible.
>|>
>|> Cobblers. To fall towards the sun you angle the sail so that the net
>|> force (which is perpendicular to the sail) reduces your orbital
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Isn't this only true in a medium such as air?  The perpendicular force is
>due to lift generated by the passage of air around the sail (or other such
>lifting body).  A sail in space could only provide force directly away
>from the sun, no matter what the angle of said sail.

The sail is assumed to be reflective, and (if you remember your high school
optics) angle of incidence equals angle of reflection. The net force is in the
opposite direction to the change in the light's momentum vector.

Like this :

                                                    ..........
                                                        ... .
                                                     ...   .   Net thrust
      *****                                       ...     .
     *     *       Light            \          ...       .
    *       * ------------------>    \      ...
    *  SUN  * ------------------>     \
    *       * ------------------>      \
     *     *                            \  <-- Sail
      *****                              \
                              / / /
                             / / /
                            / / /
                           / / /  Reflected light
                          / / /
                         L L L

By angling the sail so that it's almost edge on to the sunlight, you can get
a (fairly low) thrust almost at right angles to the incident light.

>|> velocity. The World Space Foundation was intending to use a sail to
>|> send a probe to Mercury, using this very technique.
>|>
>|> Anyone wanting to know more spend some time over on sci.space. I'm
>|> just passing through this newsgroup and I'm amazed at the amount of
>|> unscientific nonsense that is spouted in an authoritative manner here.
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Ahem.

Ahem yourself :-)

--
...... Ross Smith (Wanganui, NZ) ...... alien@acheron.amigans.gen.nz ......
   Mine is the ship bound for Alpha Centauri
   We must be out of our minds
   For though we are shipmates bound for tomorrow
   Everyone here's flying blind                          (Crystal Gayle)
--

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com>
Subject: favorite movie one-liners
Reply-To: "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 15 Dec 92 01:11:13 EST

Howdy Drew!

No, no, you made a mistake - that word wasn't the prisoner's saying.

THAT WAS THE ALTERNATIVE TITLE....

Take care

Robert
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: kiniry@giane.cs.umass.edu (Joe Kiniry)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: HIGHLANDER II..seen extra scenes!!!
Summary: Highlander FAQ
Date: 12 Dec 92 04:06:22 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Just so you all know, a Highlander FAQ has already been started and has
quite a bit of information in it right now (like a dozen or so pages).
Also, a script is in the works.  If anyone has anything they'd like to
contribute, please mail me.  (I'm the 'keeper' of sorts.)  The faq will
be completed (in its first, nice version) sometime in January.  You
know how students run you around during finals!

---joe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~   Sure, the white man came an leveled the forests, dug up the land,   ~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   and gave us the flu, but they also brought  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~   power tools... penicillin...and Ben & Gerry's ice cream.  ~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   --- Marilyn, _Northern Exposure_ ---  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com>
Subject: unrealistic space scenes
Reply-To: "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 20 Dec 92 03:36:34 EST

Howdy!

About those magic bullets that kill by shock without touching the
body... please quickly forget it. There's NO such bullet. What DOES
exist, however, is that modern small caliber bullets (say, under 6 mm)
tend to induce something called hydro-shock (I can't remember the proper
phrase, so pros outthere please don't crucify me...), a wave in the
bodily fluids that causes lethal shock, even though the actual physical
damage is very little (except when the bullet gets stuck in the body, &
starts ricocheting...).

   BTW, the explanation about the untouched body armor is simple (IMHO,
of course): the Star Wars trilogy tried to avoid showing gruesome
scenes, as it was primarily targeted at general audience. People with
scorch marks & blown off heads would hardly have fit to this demand...

Take care

Robert
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: mcfar@dialup.UUCP (Lincoln McFarland)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Unrealistic space scenes
Keywords: nnn
Date: 15 Dec 92 18:44:55 GMT
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale

>>Solar sailers are only good near a star, they won't work in interstellar space.
>>No light, no solar wind to move them.  The biggest problem with high speed 
>
>You also can only move into one direction using sails: away from the
>sun. Sailing against the wind, like it's possible on the ocean isn't
>possible.

A solar sailer is subjected to two forces: "light wind" and gravity.  It
stays in orbit with its angular momentum.  Therefore, if you set your sails
to reduce your angular momentum you can move against the wind with the
aid of gravity!  Very clever actually. You can also set your sails to add
to your angular momentum and move away from the star.  This would be a cheep
way to move slowly between any of the inner planets.  Perhaps this is the
way to ship bulk goods throught out the solar system. 


|"But what jobs are there in a backwards reality for a dead hologram and an  |
| android with a head shaped like a novelty condom?" -A.J. Rimmer            |
|                                                                            |
| Randy McFarland                         mcfar@sunfse.ese.lmse.lockheed.com |
From: jdunning@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (John Alan Dunning)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: alien 4 - not stop-motion
Date: 16 Dec 92 16:03:38 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Dec14.2756.2423@dosgate> "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com> writes:
>Sorry John for butting in, but... the video came out about three weeks
>ago! You can't really be called a video-buff, I guess...

That's probably true.  The last time I was in a video store was when
I was home at Thanksgiving.  There was a Coming Soon poster for the video,
so I assumed it wasn't out yet.

John
 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: duelge@schaefer.math.wisc.edu (Jason Duelge)
Subject: Re: i watched alien 3
Reply-To: duelge@schaefer.UUCP (Jason Duelge)
Organization: Univ. of Wisconsin Dept. of Mathematics
Distribution: rec
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 00:06:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.2756.2367@dosgate> "robert winkler" <robert.winkler@canrem.com> writes:
>Howdy!
>
>Well, Hal, opinions & tastes are different. One thing though: I think
>you've got to suspend much more than a little belief to find this movie
>enjoyable. After all, the inherent logic of this trilogy is supposed to
>be the backbone of the story - if you break it, you get a cripple called
>Alien 3...
>
>Take care
>
>Robert

I agree.  If you break the 'inherent logic', you get a cripple.  Aliens
was that cripple.

Jason
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Jason Duelge                                                              |
| 141 Lakewood                                                              |
|  Gardens ln                                                               |
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:03:50 EST
From: <JTB117@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien 4 - NOT stop-motion animation!! (and it's a doggie)
 <1992Dec10.124758.27576@cc.tut.fi> <1992Dec11.022152.2303@Princeton.EDU>

Hello folks I am writing here to let you in on a secret the process that was
used for the tunnel shots in A3.  The Alien was a puppet...  so that part
was partially correct.  You guys almost guessed the proccess they used.  It
is called Go- motion, however, this is not a new technique.  ILM was using
it way back in Return of the Jedi.  The process of Go- motion is where a
puppet is rigged w/ motors and servos and all of it's motions are controled
by a computer.  If you want more info.  mail me.  Babylon 5 will be out this
Feb.  on a new channel, Warner Bros.



Again if you would like more info. drop a line.
I do have to chuckle..."Ray-Tracing???"
Justin
God Imaging Inc.
From: drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu (David Gutierrez)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Unrealistic space scenes
Date: 15 Dec 1992 18:35:08 GMT
Organization: Univ. Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center

In article <1992Dec14.141510.62034@cc.usu.edu> slb3y@cc.usu.edu (Punk
Rocketeer) writes:
>     After watching ROTJ again last night, I have to disagree.  Modern
>weapons are clearly inferior.  Han Solo's blaster pistol penetrates
>Imperial stormtrooper armor without even scratching the white paint. 
>No scorch marks, no holes, nothing, yet the trooper dies.  The same
>thing seems to be true of all Rebel blasters.  Maybe they've developed
>something that completely bypasses IS armor but damages the underlying
>flesh.  Or maybe IS armor acts as a power boost/focussing agent for
>blaster bolts.

As I've pointed out before, that armor is probably made by the lowest bidder.

David Gutierrez
drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu

"Only fools are positive." - Moe Howard

Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:9447 rec.arts.movies:35561 alt.cult-movies:11312
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: ** Please help ID this movie **
Date: 17 Dec 92 06:18:07 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
NNTP-Posting-Host: schutz.ee.uts.edu.au

>In article <Byx3tu.6q0@max.physics.sunysb.edu> danube@max.physics.sunysb.edu (Dan Koller*) writes:

>       Spaceship (of earthlings) is on some very dark and forboding planet.
>   Very red and volcanic, and things bubbling up out of the ground.  Members
>   of the crew are dissapearing.  Crewmember X (I don't remeber his name)
>   finally confronts one of the crew who has re-appeared.  I remember a scene
>   where this returned "crewmember" unzipped his black (leather?) flight jacket

I think it was "The Last Flight of the Memphis Belle": the spaceship you
saw had a perfectly rational explanation: it was just an aeroplane! The
red bubbling was bombs being let off over Germany, an easy mistake to
make. 

-ricko
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies