HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hafner@ifi.unizh.ch (Michel Hafner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Date: 21 Jul 92 10:47:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: ifi.1992Jul21.104715.3221
Organization: University of Zurich, Department of Computer Science

In article <1992Jul17.173405.1@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu> bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu (Greg Bole) writes:
>In the August issue of Premiere magazine, they put together a top jury to 
>decide what they thought were the ten best Science Fiction Movies ever.  
>In no particular order the films were:
>1.  2001:  A Space Odyssey

Well, it's the "Citizen Kane" of Science Fiction

>2.  Metropolis

Visually one of the most arresting silent films, deserves a place on the list

>3.  The Day the Earth Stood Still

Why not.

>4.  Invasion of the Body Snatchers

old or new? ( Old, of course, you dummy.... )

>5.  Blade Runner

I couldn't agree more

>6.  Star Wars

I couldn't agree less. Technically a milestone, artistically average.

>7.  War of the Worlds

Why not?

>8.  Forbidden Planet

Why? Because it was x years in the working and had neat effects for the time?

>9.  A Clockwork Orange

Wrong category. 

>10. Alien

If you say "Alien" you have to say "Aliens"!

Where are the "artsy" movies?
( Solaris, The man who fell to earth... )
								M.H.
From: Shadowmar@cup.portal.com (Paul Joseph Furio)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Kobyashi Maru
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 20:53:56 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

A question:  I saw Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn on a major network the oth
day.  I just caught the beginning, when the Vulcan captain is taking the
Kobyashi Maru test.  I was wondering:  This is a neat test and are there any
Computer Games, Role Playing games, Board Games etc that simulate the Maru
test?  Obviously, a real simulator like the one she was using would be best,
but seeing as how there is no starfleet, maybe a simulator exists?  It 
would definately be interesting to attempt the Maru test, and perhaps even
"reprogram" it as Kird allegedly did.  Any info would be appreciated.
	Paul J. Furio
	Shadowmar@cup.portal.com
From: cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: The Bode'/Bakshi thang
Date: 21 Jul 92 04:09:13 GMT
Reply-To: cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
Originator: cwagner@mickey.cc.utexas.edu

Regarding the whole Bakshi/Wizards vs. Bode'/Cobalt 60 thing.......

In the latest issue of Cobalt 60 (which is now a regular title drawn by Mark
Bode' and written by someone else), Cobalt 60 is in the dungeons under the
castle, and a large hairy guy reaches out of a cell and starts screaming "Fire
and Ice! Fire and Ice!" and starts rambling incoherently. C60 asks the guy in
the next cell who the first guy is, and he replies 
"That's Raff Batshit. He's serving an indefinate for copyright infringement."

Ouch........

-- 
It is better to be     |      Christian Wagner      | I may make you feel,    
quotable than honest.  | UT - Austin, CS Dept. (UG) | but I can't make you
  - Tom Stoppard       | cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu | think. - JT, "Taab"

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: at674@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Pete Nofel)
Subject: Re: Who is the Bad Guy in E.T.?
Reply-To: at674@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Pete Nofel)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 13:01:16 GMT


Hey! Hey! I got it! I got it!

Brin thinks the bad guy in E.T. is RALPH BAKSHI!

Like it matters . . .

-- 
"It's money, and adventure, and fame. It's the thrill of a lifetime.
 And a long sea voyage that starts at six o'clock come morning."
     -- Carl Denham
        "King Kong"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jrhodes@hmcvax.claremont.edu
Subject: Re: Where's Star Wars 46491
Organization: Harvey Mudd College
Date: 29 Jul 92 11:36:48 PDT

In article <scottg.04wg@amiganet.chi.il.us>, scottg@amiganet.chi.il.us (Scott Gittlitz) writes:
> In article <9207211945.AA03575@rutgers.edu>, b3gms@TTACS1.TTU.EDU ("bottrell,
> gerald") writes:
>>the "Major Science Fiction Magazine" in question is the June 1992
>>Cinefantasique.  The article is "Where's Star Wars 4?" by Nolan Wright
>>Wright says that Lucas said he was tired of doing the series.  The article
>>was very downbeat and it really sounded like Wright was taking it personally
>>that Lucas "Wasn't interested any more."
>>the big quote seems to be from the NY Times :"I ran out of energy to do
>>it," Lucas said. "Once you have done it a couple of times, then the thrill 
>>wears off and you really want to get into different territory."
>>the new territor seems to be "Young Indiana Jones".
>>
>>MJ
>  I agree totally that Wright has something against Lucas, problably taking so
> long to make the next trilogy.  I love the magazine for its in-depth articles,
> but that piticular one almost made me stop buying it.
>  
>  Well I guess  Lucas showed Wright, Star Wars (aka: Clone Wars) - Episode I

Which day in May?




> will be out May 1997.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The Man from Another Place)
Subject: Re: sourcebook of SF movies/TV shows
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 08:48:07 GMT

In article <TNT.92Jul29131342@netcom.com>, tnt@netcom.com (Terry Turner) writes...

} the book i use as an sf film bible is _the film encyclopedia - science
} fiction_, by phil hardy. my edition covers through 1982. it only covers 
} film and i have been told that it is missing some films. i have no 
} evidence of this however.

I have evidence of this. Well, there's at least one sf film that is not
in the book that should be. A 1980 British/French/German co-production
titled DEATH WATCH, directed by Bertrand Tavernier, and starring Romy
Schneider, Harvey Keitel, Harry Dean Stanton, and Max von Sydow. It's
based on the sf novel THE CONTINUOUS KATHERINE MORTENHOE [a.k.a. THE
UNSLEEPING EYE] by D.G. Compton. Excellent, in my opinion, both as a film
and as science fiction. Even Leonard Maltin gives it 3-1/2 stars.

} i swear by it. i wish i could find a newer edition.

You can't find one because there isn't one. Hardy did three such
encyclopediae. The first volume was on Westerns (which I haven't been
able to find; if anyone knows where I could get ahold of a copy, I'd
be interested), the second on SF, and the third on Horror. None of
them have had second editions, nor have there been any more since.

-- 

	"She's my radiation baby.
	 She's my teenage fallout girl."

--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, "The Mill", Maynard, MA)

    boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com
From: eric_gorr@coglab_psych.uoregon.edu (Eric Gorr)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Nightfall & Isaac Asimov
Date: 31 Jul 92 17:18:20 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon


Well, since you purposfully left out whether or not you really liked or
hated the movie, I will respond with my real opinion and not some
sarcastic(sp?) jibber.

I * * H A T E D * * this movie.  It was like they took the best short story
ever writting, said that they would make a movie about it and they
completely ignored it.  There was nothing recognizable between the short
story and the movie exect for the comming of nightfall.  I could go one
about the differences, but I wish to get some sleep in the next two days...

I beg you, NOBODY SEE THIS MOVIE!  (I rented it in a video store when I saw
it and only because I didn't know what it really was and I am a great fan
of ASIMOV.) 


In article <0095E63E.44B71DE0@vms.csd.mu.edu>, 2117steplerl@vms.csd.mu.edu
writes:
> 
> Has anyone besides me seen this movie?  It made a really big impact
> on me and I was wondering what others thought of it.  "Nightfall" came
> out in early 1988 I believe.  Why have I not seen it in video stores.
> I want someone else to have seen it so that I know that this incredible
> movie was not my Imagination!
> 					Step
From: gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Close Encounters ending sucked (was: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies)
Date: 27 Jul 92 19:57:22 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <BD.92Jul27093914@fluent.UUCP>, bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby) writes:
> in article <3636@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
> >	WHAT?!
> >	That was what the whole movie was leading UP to! Roy Neary,
> >the daydreamer, the one who really WANTED to go to the stars, being
> >one of those chosen to go... and finally attaining his dream!
> Yeah, I understood the ending - I just disliked it!  Too syrupy, too corny.
> None of the edge that the rest of the movie had.  Anticlimactic, at best.

Although I felt that way as a kid, I wonder about it now. Seems to me that
the movie was a continual build-up and it really didn't matter what they
did at the end it was going to be a let-down. I enjoy the film but have
often wondered if there was any ending that would have just made this film
the ultimate movie of all time for me....



			gln
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Star Trek VII??
Date: 22 Jul 92 17:59:17 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <3088@ra.nrl.navy.mil> ghost@ra.nrl.navy.mil (G. Host) writes:
>Are there any Jim Kirk fans out there amoung the Star Trek fans

	Yep. I've always been a fan of Captain James Tiberius Kirk,
overacting and all. He's been a personal hero-icon of mine for a long time.
Shatner's directorial and writing talents are irrelevant to the character
as a character, so my only feeling is, someone shove Shatner in front of
the camera and keep him on that side, not the other.

>and why does Paramount think that people are returning to see
>Kirk again after Star Trek: TNG's success.

	Now THERE is an implied lapse in logic. The fact that ST: TNG is
successful does not imply in any way that the original crew is no longer
popular.

>Heres hoping for a time-travel movie with both Kirk and Wesley
>ordered to go clean out the torpedo tubes just before a battle.

	I happen to like Wesley, too. The character himself was pretty 
interesting, and over time developed in some cool ways. It's not HIS
fault that he ends up saving the ship.

                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien 3
Date: 21 Jul 92 13:11:43 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <fmonro.711717284@neumann.une.edu.au>, by fmonro@neumann.une.edu.au (F J Monro):
> Why not look at it the other way around? With only one alien needing 
> the ability to reproduce,

Because it's not convincing the other way round.  The point is exactly
that to survive, you "need" that ability in more than one.  This part
of the discussion got started by the realization that the Aliens on
that planet are done for because the queen's gone.  Go back and read
those posts again, I'm not going to type the same arguments over and
over.

> So to kill the aliens, you first have to kill hundreds of warriors, who
> are biologically programmed to give up their lives for the cause if need be.

Fighting to the death in face of a superior force is not necessarily
the best strategy.  If there's no queen to protect, you can run, hide,
and try again later.

> Then you have to kill the queen...

So what?  Don't make sound it harder than it is.  The queen profited
from surprise and special circumstances in Aliens.  Ripley did not
need to kill her, since the reactor would have taken care of that. She
didn't anticipate that the queen would follow her on board the ship.
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien 3
Date: 24 Jul 92 12:27:10 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <fmonro.711974141@neumann.une.edu.au>, by fmonro@neumann.une.edu.au (F J Monro):
> All right, I'll give you that, but what I would comment is that with any
> 'real' animal, these single generalized animals would be less formidable
> than the specialized 'warrior' animals. So having an alien which is a
> 'perfect killing machine' is in my veiw, more consistent with a hive animal.

Which would mean that the queen was an easy kill?  Insect warrior
"designs" usually are based on size, strength, large jaws, and armor,
none of which appear to be particular properties of the "warrior"
Aliens in Aliens, and the queen was not notably deficient in speed or
strenght after shedding her hindparts. Note also that I was talking
about survival on the racial level, and as such a killer that is more
likely to be able to propagate is more effective.  At this point we
can join the discussion about the Moties in rec.arts.sf.written.  :-)
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
From: ken@batman.austin.ibm.com (Ken Goach)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Tank Girl
Keywords: Tank Girl Anime
Date: 20 Jul 92 15:28:23 GMT
Reply-To: ken@batman.austin.ibm.com (Ken Goach)
Organization: IBM Austin, TX


#In article <3508@keele.keele.ac.uk> phd99@seq1.keele.ac.uk (Asmodeus) writes:
#>They had on sale an anime which featured Tank Girl - it was not actually
#>called that, and the video was acts I and II, with a caption saying acts
#>III and IV would be available shortly. I presume this is based on the
#>comic strip.
#
#All four are available now (our West Coast Video has all four parts). I don't
#know whether the laserdisc is out yet.


I believe the latest Sight and Sound catalog listed a Dominion LD with
all four episodes.

Given the anime thread, maybe we should move this to rec.arts.anime??


THIS POSTING DOES NOT REPRESENT THE OPINIONS OF MY EMPLOYERS.
-------------------------------------------------------------
"... watch from high atop Tokyo Tower as the twisted world
you created explodes in rivers of blood and endless pain..."
    -Tom Servo, announcer, monster action playset commercial
-------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: mephron@tronsbox.xei.com (Mephron)
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 18:14:43 GMT

In article <mcirvin.711766638@husc10> mcirvin@husc10.harvard.edu (Mcirvin) writes:
>mephron@tronsbox.xei.com (Mephron) writes:
>
>>I would add in my all-time, for-all-time-and-space-and-alternate-dimensions
>>fave:  The Adventures Of Buckaroo Banzai Across The Eighth Dimension.  Maybe
>>it's the engaging characters ("It'sa John Whorfin!"), the loony plotline
>>("There!  Pure and Simple!  Evil!  From the eighth dimension!"), the silly
>>yet reasonable tech, or the fact it's just fun.  I know few people who dislike
>>it, and many many rabid fans.
>
>Silly yet REASONABLE tech?!  Slander!
>"It's made of cobalt... and electricity!"

Yes, reasonable.  I mean, the Jet Car LOOKS like something a small shop would
put out.  They do rock'n'roll to pay some of the bills.  Most of the tech we
see looks so kluged and prototypey that it almost convinces you that it's real.

Ah, what they heck.  It's the only movie I ever wore out on videotape.

>I know many people who dislike it.  I don't know why...  Peter Weller
>once speculated that possibly people were duped by the action-movie
>editing into not realizing it was supposed to be funny.

I do know people who don't like it.  Most of them, when sat down with a bunch
of fans, convert.  We point out all the really bizarre things (can you
REALLY sit there and listen to Lithgow's accent without cracking up?), and
they see the parody inherent in it.
>-- 
>Matt McIrvin, grad student, Dept. of Physics, Harvard University
>mcirvin@husc.harvard.edu      mumble mumble mumble mumble mumble


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: Cool World and Bakshi: Brin reply
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 14:54:47 GMT

David Brin writes:
>The other brother works hard, loves a wife and child,

I have been reading this on and off, but this one line just begs to be 
discredited. From the film:

Other brother (name escapes me): Will it be a male or a female?
Assistant: Female, the signs say, Milord.
Other Brother: The next one woun't be.
Wife (crys out): You'll not have her killed...
(later, near the end of the film, the wife comes out with the body of the baby)

Leaving aside the "works Hard" as that is not necessarily a good thing - it
depends on what he is working hard for - I am not sure where you got the "loves
a wife a child". Are you saying that he is planning on loving a male child, if
and when his wife has one? Or are you saying that somehow you feel that he 
loves the female baby, even though he has her killed?

Michael


-- 
Michael Kaufman | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on
 kaufman        | fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in
  @eecs.nwu.edu | the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be
                | lost in time - like tears in rain. Time to die.     Roy Batty
From: deb@loni.ucla.edu (Debjoti Sensharma)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Kobyashi Maru
Date: 30 Jul 92 17:49:08 GMT
Organization: UCLA Laboratory of Neuroimaging

>>>Scotty,
>>>well, the simulator's computer would figure (mathematically) that the
>>>Klingon shilelds would work one way even though they don't, he took
>>>advantage of that little flaw, having himself disproved that particular
>>>theory (he cheated! :-).
>>
>>Although this should really belong on one of the Star Trek groups, I believe 
>>in ST2:TWOK, they mentioned that KIRK was the ONLY and SOLE person to defeat
>>the K. Maru simulator.

>Who said that Scotty, Sulu, and Chekhov DEFEATED it?  The book details
>their 'solutions' where 'solutions' = 'valiant but doomed attempts.'

>Sulu loses because he ignored the distress call. Chekhov because his
>ship was killed, and Scotty because he gets killed anyway by ever
>increasing numbers of ships.

Then Kirk would not have been the only one to succeed (as mentioned in TWOK) 
since he too cheated like Scotty...  Why was no one else mentioned?









Debjoti Sensharma
UCLA Laboratory of Neuroimaging
[************YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED****************]
[*************RESISTANCE IS FUTILE******************]
From: matt@cray.com (Matthew Marchese)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Date: 21 Jul 92 07:03:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: walter.1992Jul21.020301.14956
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

In article <1992Jul20.164052.19868@nntp.uoregon.edu> Eric_Gorr@coglab_psych.uoregon.edu (Eric gorr) writes:
>> In no particular order the films were:
>> 
>> 1.  2001:  A Space Odyssey
>> 2.  Metropolis
>> 3.  The Day the Earth Stood Still
>> 4.  Invasion of the Body Snatchers
>> 5.  Blade Runner
>> 6.  Star Wars
>> 7.  War of the Worlds
>> 8.  Forbidden Planet
>> 9.  A Clockwork Orange
>> 10. Alien
>> 
>> How many do *you* agree with?  And what do you feel is missing?  And more
>> importantly, why?
>
>E.T. is clearly missing from the list...
>
Hmmm, I'm not a Spielberg fan by any stretch of the imagination but even
I would have included "Close Encounters" simply because of it's incredible
cinematography and the initial impact it had on me when I first saw it.
Seeing it in 70mm Dolby I got the distinct impression that Stevie was
experimenting with sub-sonics in an attempt to get the entire audience
to lose control of their bodily functions. Several of my friends also
reported strange emotional and psychological effects with seemed to be
cued to the soundtrack.

As for E.T. I found it to be rather manipulative and derivative. I also
found it hard to concentrate on the film because of the loud *whizzing*
noise being generated by Walt Disney spinning in his grave :)...


*******************************************************************************
*  "Supernatural, perhaps...Baloney, perhaps not" - Bela Lugosi  *            *
******************************************************************            *
Matt Marchese	    The opinions expressed here are not those of my employer, *
Cray Research  	    my wife, my church, or myself...But they are the opinions *
DKRZ                of Elvis as revealved to me through the medium of my pet  *
Hamburg, Germany    hamster, Lee Harvey Oswald...                             *
*******************************************************************************
From: mcirvin@husc10.harvard.edu (Mcirvin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Date: 22 Jul 92 00:41:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc10.mcirvin.711765675

bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu (Greg Bole) writes:

>>"Because it's long."
>>   Terry Gilliam
>2001:  A Space Odyssey

Personally, I'd put Gilliam's _Brazil_ on the list, but I suppose
they couldn't put it on and be unbiased.  Granted, the story line
is mostly appropriated from stuff like _1984_, with Lowry's daydreams
replacing Winston Smith's Golden Land, but the movie is a fleshed-out,
disturbing dystopia with lots of morbid humor and Gilliam's trademark
monumental visuals.  The atmospherics are on par with _Blade Runner_,
though in a much different direction.  Just the wheezing ducts in 
Sam Lowry's apartment make it worth seeing.  Influence from this
showed up, or at least seemed to, in everything from ads for oil
heating to the Max Headroom TV show.

-- 
Matt McIrvin, grad student, Dept. of Physics, Harvard University
mcirvin@husc.harvard.edu      mumble mumble mumble mumble mumble
From: lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Date: 23 Jul 1992 22:23:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co.

In article <4975@transfer.stratus.com>, jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Jul20.164052.19868@nntp.uoregon.edu>  
> Eric_Gorr@coglab_psych.uoregon.edu (Eric gorr) writes:
> > > In no particular order the films were:
> > > 
> > > 1.  2001:  A Space Odyssey
> > > 2.  Metropolis
> > > 3.  The Day the Earth Stood Still
> > > 4.  Invasion of the Body Snatchers
> > > 5.  Blade Runner
> > > 6.  Star Wars
> > > 7.  War of the Worlds
> > > 8.  Forbidden Planet
> > > 9.  A Clockwork Orange
> > > 10. Alien
> > > 


I like this list. However, you can't exempt E. T. I'd also add

Andromeda Strain
When Worlds collide
Marooned
The Fly
The Blob (yes I'm serious)

Norman
From: wixer!cactus.org!wixer!pro-smof.cts.com!rfletcher@cactus.org (Robert Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Wizards
Date: 23 Jul 1992 04:45:30 -0500
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

  The animation industry is in a boom now. There is a shortages of animator
because everyone of the old studios has prodjects and there are new studios
poping up.
  There is money in animated feature films and televisions serierals.
(sorry but I am not using spell check on this.)
----
ProLine:  rfletcher@pro-smof
Internet: rfletcher@pro-smof.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher
ARPA:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher@nosc.mil