HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pwg25888@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Patrick W. Grady)
Subject: Re: Predator/Minigun question
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:25:25 GMT

jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:

>I was rewatching Predator recently and have a question about the scene 
>in which Mac discovered Blaine's body and let loose with the minigun - 
>he emptied the gun, though, but kept his hands on the trigger so that the
>gun chambers continued to revolve. What's the power source for this? I 
>had thought that most semi- and full-automatics used the power of the 
>current round being fired to chamber the next round or turn the chamber
>or whatever. This couldn't be the case here, so what was spinning the 
>chamber?
>-- 
>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>                           | Support the coup!
>CompuServe: 74076,1250     |
>Internet: jrs@netcom.com   |

True, most guns use recoil or gas expansion to cycle rounds through the
chamber, but the minigun is a rotary action set of barrels.  This has the
barrels spinning and feeds the rounds through a cam shaped path to insert
the round in the barrel breach before firing and the path out automatically
extracs the spent cartridge.  This is all powered by either a electric 
motor on hand carried and helicopter mounts and hydraulics in larger guns
in jet aircraft (especially in the A-10, which needs 77 horsepower to 
drive the GAU-8A gatling cannon).  In the case of the movie, the mingun
fired 5.56x39mm N rounds at approximatly 3000 rounds per minute.  The 
battery pack has a 5 minute life expectancy at continous usage, which is
longer than the ammo carried along will last.

	Patrick Grady
	---
	pwg25888@uiuc.edu
From: uhschreg@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Ulrich Schreglmann)
Subject: Re: terminator ii flaw
Organization: Student Pool, CSD, University of Erlangen, Germany
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:20:18 GMT

corwin@ensta.ensta.fr (Gilles Gravier) writes:


>About T2 flaws... Arnold says: I'm a cybernetic organism; Living tissue over
>metal endo-skeleton. OK, good. Even better, when he gets wounded by bullets, 
>we clearly see his wounds... And blood (sure, very few of it)... So it seems
>that his outer skin is human style... But, did you notice, when he arrives,
>just at the beginning of the film, the sphere he comes in, leaves the matter at
>it's limits very hot... Indeed, it is so hot that even the concreet is glowing
>a fiery red... concreet on whch arnie is crouching... Shouldn't it show on his
>hands, knees, feet when he stands up? (even if it regenerates in the next few
>hours)...

He may have exercised firewalking beforehand.  :-)


May the Internal Cooling System Be with You!

(C)OOL mcmxcii
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana Kouhia)
Subject: Re: Blade Runner / Violence, quoestion
Organization: Tampere University of Technology
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 17:43:45 GMT


In article <1992Nov6.224402.25596@u.washington.edu>
redrum@carson.u.washington.edu (Joe Stremick) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.204837.494@cc.tut.fi> jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana
>Kouhia) writes:
>>
>>Does the director's cut 1992 of Blade Runner contain
>>the violence in European release had?
>>In USA, the extra violence is available on Criterion
>>disc.
>
>	No, the extra seconds of violence are not seen in the
>Director's Cut.  I was dissapointed.

Uh oh.
When I saw the released version I got feeling about cutting
violence away in following places (at least); I'm not sure
is there violence in all these places, but somehow I feel
that they were is Director's cut when I saw it.

1. Leon shoot the interviewer
2. Eye maker
3. Tyrell's eyes
4. Acrobatic female who is shot by Deckard
 
These surely are not all.
I'm positive about 1, 3 and 4.
I know that the case 3 is true.
I'm not sure about 2, but feeling about cutting is strong.

I'm disappointed too.
By the way, the current Director's cut is not Ridley's,
instead it is made by a film archive man at film company.
Ridley's version was lost.
(Maybe you allready knew that.)
Maybe Ridley's version did contain violence, but not archive mans?

Juhana Kouhia
From: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: European versions
Date: 10 Nov 92 23:08:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: sarah.1992Nov10.230853.20827
Reply-To: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Organization: University of NY at Albany

In regards to the european versions of films people keep referring to (
which seem to be more complete/coherent).  What do you mean
by european versions?  Ie., do you mean versions in German,
Italian, French, etc that were shown in Europe?  Or all copies
of the film shown in europe(like a copy of the film in English
that was shown in england???  So dumb idiots like me who don't
know any language but english will understand it).  Also,
were can we in the U.S.A. get a copy of these films???

thanks for any help
Gary Mort
GM1116@albnyvms
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
From: anderson@scs.unt.edu (Richard Anderson (Lab 3460))
Subject: Re: Deckard as 6th Replicant doesn't hold water
Organization: School of Community Service, UNT
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:26:25 GMT

In article <720976152.25474@minster.york.ac.uk> sjbuckle@minster.york.ac.uk writes:
>From: sjbuckle@minster.york.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: Deckard as 6th Replicant doesn't hold water
>Date: 5 Nov 92 15:09:14 GMT
>Sorry, I've just started reading this group: could someone explain to me why
>this thread is called "Deckard as 6th Replicant..." ? Is it something to do
>with the bit that puzzles me in Bladerunner where the chief of police tells
>Deckard that 6 replicants jumped ship, but then only describes the fate/    
>whereabouts of 5 of them ?

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh (Primal Scream) hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

_____________________________________________________________________________
Rich Anderson                          |
Dept. of Unsubstantiated Rumors        |    Ignorance is bliss......
   and Inuendo                         |
University of North Texas              |    Bon Appitite.
anderson@scs.unt.edu                   |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Predator/Minigun question
Date: 10 Nov 92 17:07:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Nov10.170757.11011
Distribution: usa
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

I was rewatching Predator recently and have a question about the scene 
in which Mac discovered Blaine's body and let loose with the minigun - 
he emptied the gun, though, but kept his hands on the trigger so that the
gun chambers continued to revolve. What's the power source for this? I 
had thought that most semi- and full-automatics used the power of the 
current round being fired to chamber the next round or turn the chamber
or whatever. This couldn't be the case here, so what was spinning the 
chamber?
-- 
John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
                           | Support the coup!
CompuServe: 74076,1250     |
Internet: jrs@netcom.com   |
From: ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Blade runner..... (what are replicants)
Date: 12 Nov 92 04:21:03 GMT
Reply-To: ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu
Organization: 3WA, Boston Office. Or Nu Meta Chi. Take your pick.
X-Posting-Software: GNUS 3.14.1 [ NNTP-based News Reader for GNU Emacs ]
X-Signature-Virus-Protection: Version 1.51
X-Get-A-Clue: Have two, they're small.

>>>>> In article <1992Nov11.220230.1@hamp.hampshire.edu>,
>>>>> glinden@hamp.hampshire.edu writes:

g> 	Ok.. heres something about Blade runner I believe hasn't come
g> up before...(Yeah right) Replicants... I believe they were
g> genitacally preprogrammed and perfect humans... I was under the
g> assumption they were robots.. but a friend told me that and it
g> makes sence.... no pulling punches..  he just couldnt go through
g> him... programmed memories.. Deckards sex with a replicant....

Replicants are, for all intent and purposes, robots built from
engineered human genetic material force-grown to "adulthood." This is
why there are two ways to distinguish a replicant from a human. One is
to litterally disect the suspected replicant, which terminates it's
function (or life if a human is disected). The second is the Voight-
Kampf test, a form of Turing Test.

--Rat
||||| | | | |  |  |  |   |   |    |    |    |   |   |  |  |  |  | | | | | |||||
Northeastern's Stainless Steel Rat          ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu
It is a proud and lonely thing to be a Stainless Steel Rat.
                                                        --`Slippery' Jim DiGriz
From: ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Predator/Minigun question
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:11:13 GMT
Reply-To: ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: 3WA, Boston Office. Or Nu Meta Chi. Take your pick.
X-Posting-Software: GNUS 3.14.1 [ NNTP-based News Reader for GNU Emacs ]
X-Signature-Virus-Protection: Version 1.51
X-Get-A-Clue: Have two, they're small.

>>>>> "JS" == John Switzer <jrs@netcom.com> writes:

JS> I was rewatching Predator recently and have a question about the scene 
JS> in which Mac discovered Blaine's body and let loose with the minigun - 
JS> he emptied the gun, though, but kept his hands on the trigger so that the
JS> gun chambers continued to revolve. What's the power source for this? I 
JS> had thought that most semi- and full-automatics used the power of the 
JS> current round being fired to chamber the next round or turn the chamber
JS> or whatever. This couldn't be the case here, so what was spinning the 
JS> chamber?

All forms of modern rotary cannon, from the 5.56mm miniguns up to the
GAU-8A Avenger on the A-10 Warthog, as well as single-barrel "chain
guns", use an electric motor to spin the barrels and to drive the
ammunition feed. The benefits of using an electric drive is that a dud
round won't totally jam up the works: the barrels keep spinning and
the driven belt feeds the dud round out of the chamber as the next
round feeds in.

--Rat
||||| | | | |  |  |  |   |   |    |    |    |   |   |  |  |  |  | | | | | |||||
Northeastern's Stainless Steel Rat          ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu
Take in the now / Your taste belongs in my eyes and in my mind / Now I see
                                                              --Braindance, Now
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana Kouhia)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Blade Runner / Violence, quoestion
Date: 5 Nov 92 20:48:37 GMT
Organization: Tampere University of Technology



Does the director's cut 1992 of Blade Runner contain
the violence in European release had?
In USA, the extra violence is available on Criterion
disc.

Juhana  Kouhia
From: redrum@carson.u.washington.edu (Joe Stremick)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Computers in Films/TV
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:21:42 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle


	I don't know the computer's name, but there was a really
interesting one in _Demon Seed_.
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-Joe Stremick,               |"I want to learn the ways of the Force  |
|       a.k.a. Redrum         | and become a Jedi like my father. . ." |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.sf.starwars
From: nnhill@david.wheaton.edu (Nathan N Hill)
Subject: Ewok meals
Organization: Wheaton College, IL
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 05:20:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov3.012004.14670@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Gordon.S.Witter@dartmouth.edu (Gordon S. Witter) writes:
>
>Maybe the Ewoks are still planning to eat the humans after all.  Maybe
>the reason they helped the rebels defeat the imperial forces was just
>to get more of the rebels to come down for dinner?
>
>"Episode VII:  An Ewok Feast"?    8)
>
>-dino

I've been reading r.a.s.s. for som time, and this is the funniest thing I've
seen yet...I would have mailed you, but the server's broke.

							local Star Wars guru
______________________________________________________________________________

"You bet your asteroid." --Ham Salad

					Nathan Hill (nnhill@david.wheaton.edu)
______________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jim@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Jagielski)
Subject: Re: Deckard WAS a replicant!
Reply-To: jim@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Jagielski)
Organization: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:51:23 GMT

donald@dvinci.USask.Ca (David Donald) writes:

>I've only seen BR a couple of times, but one thing has always bothered me... 

>Remember the fight seen between Leon and Deckard?  OK, at one point, when 
>Leon's beating on Deckard, he punches _through_ a big, steel trash bin.  Then, 
>one or two scenes later, the hits Deckard two or three times in the stomach and
>chest area.  If Deckard is not a replicant, why didn't he "splash", ie, why 
>didn't Leon punch right through him.

Hmmm... I always thought of this as Leon palying around with Deckard...
scaring him and just beating the crap out of him until it was "time to die"
for Deckard...
-- 
    Jim Jagielski               | "It is not I who am crazy...
    jim@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov   |  it is I who am MAD!"
    NASA/GSFC, Code 734.4       |
    Greenbelt, MD 20771         |            - Ren
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Highlander Sequels (some ideas and ramblings)
From: ace@kryton.UUCP (Catherine Beckstead)
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 08:27:21 PST
Organization: Paradox Alley F&SF BBS 805-492-8789

morgan@arc.ab.ca (Sean Morgan) writes:

> H III??? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought a movie had to be a
>success for a sequel to be made.  Don't tell me that somebody actually
>made money off H II
> 

Yeah, Sean Connery, he made a mint! :)


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Catherine Beckstead                    ace@kryton.uucp
"Do you want to argue with a can of deodorant that registers
NINE on the Richter scale?"        --Ace, in "Dragonfire"
From: miller@FS1.cam.nist.gov (Bruce R. Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Computers in Films/TV
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:17:40 GMT
Organization: NIST - Computing and Applied Mathematics Laboratory


In article <1992Nov9.104025.23251@maths.tcd.ie>, Ross Chandler writes:
> miller@FS1.cam.nist.gov (Bruce R. Miller) writes:
> >Ecktually... I believe Joshua was the password used to get in the
> >trapdoor.  It was the name of the son (or something) of Warner who'd
> > ...
> Wasn't he called Prof. Falken not warner?

That sounds about right.  I'm terrible with names, I'm lucky to have
remembered Joshua!  Since I didn't remember the character's name, I
used the name of the actor:  John Warner, isn't it?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: morten.steinhauer@thcave.no (Morten Steinhauer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Deckard WAS a replica
Date: 11 Nov 92 17:34:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Thunderball Cave BBS - Oslo, Norway  (47 2) 56 70 18
Reply-To: morten.steinhauer@thcave.no (Morten Steinhauer)

In message <1992Nov10.024222.5554@access.usask.ca>
donald@dvinci.USask.Ca (David Donald) writes:

DD> Remember the fight seen between Leon and Deckard?  OK, at one point, when
  > Leon's beating on Deckard, he punches _through_ a big, steel trash bin.  Th
  > one or two scenes later, the hits Deckard two or three times in the stomach
  > chest area.  If Deckard is not a replicant, why didn't he "splash", ie, why
  > didn't Leon punch right through him.

DD> PS: Please don't say Leon was pulling his punches.  In a fight for my life,
  > wouldn't; why should he?

        But he probably *was* pulling his punches. He was simply playing
        with Deckard. Didn't Leon say something about "...time to
        die.." just before starting to insert his fingers into
        Deckard's eyes?

Morten

morten.steinhauer@thcave.no
x06mos@asd.ito.tele.no

---
 > SPEED 1.20 [NR] > My computer NEVER loc
From: KitchenRN@SSD0.LAAFB.AF.MIL
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: A new Mel Gibson Movie Preview
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:22:00 GMT

While attending a movie over the weekend, I saw a trailer for an upcoming Mel 
Gibson movie that has an SF theme.  Unfortunately, I don't remember the title 
of the movie, but it should be out soon.

The following is what I gathered the movie is about, based on scenes from the 
trailer.  There are no real SPOILERS here, because all of this comes from the 
trailer, but don't read any further if you don't want to know.

Mel Gibson plays a World War II pilot who is deeply in love with a woman, but 
he hesitates telling her how he feels.  Just as he gets up the courage to ask 
her to marry him, she's hit by a car and goes into a coma.  Mel can't stand 
the thought of her slowly slipping away into death, so he convinces somebody 
(I guess a scientist) to put him into cryogenic suspension for a year, so 
that when he wakes up, his lover will have died and he won't have to deal 
with her slow degeneration.

Somehow, he doesn't get awakened in a year.  Instead, he's discovered by two 
1990's-era boys, still frozen.  They wake him up, and he has to deal with 
life in the 90's.  (The mother of one of the boys is played by Jamie Lee 
Curtis).

Mel discovers that the woman he loved didn't die, but instead survived her 
coma, and is still alive.  There are scenes of Mel stealing a 40's-era plane 
while being chased by FBI agents.  Other scenes show Mel counseling one of 
the boys to act now, instead of hesitating, and the boy shyly looking at a 
girl that he (apparently) likes.

Sounds like a real three-hankie movie.

Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:8508 rec.arts.movies:32253 alt.cult-movies:10058
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: Deckard as 6th Replicant doesn't hold water
Date: 6 Nov 92 10:59:11 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.movies
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <720976152.25474@minster.york.ac.uk>, by sjbuckle@minster.york.ac.uk:
> Sorry, I've just started reading this group: could someone explain to me why
> this thread is called "Deckard as 6th Replicant..." ? Is it something to do
> with the bit that puzzles me in Bladerunner where the chief of police tells
> Deckard that 6 replicants jumped ship, but then only describes the fate/    
> whereabouts of 5 of them ?

Exactly.  A sixth replicant was originally intended to be present, but
later removed from the script.  They forgot to change the dialogue in
that scene.
-- 
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: JOHN@ZENO.MSCD.EDU (HUNTLY)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Highlander
Date: 10 Nov 92 14:24:04 GMT

Hi, Having heard about the European version of Highlander is kind of
frustrating.  I have the US version and like it alot.  So now ever since
people have been mentioning that there is a longer, more in depth version
I was wondering.  Is it available in the US, or just Europe?  
				Thanks 
 				John@zeno.mscd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
Subject: Re: Jurassic Park
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:59:48 GMT

In article <2AF953EC@ssd0.laafb.af.mil>, KitchenRN@SSD0.LAAFB.AF.MIL writes:
> I know that Spielberg, etc. were in the process of filming "Jurassic Park" on 
> Kauai when Hurricane Iniki hit.  Have they packed up and moved elsewhere, or 
> were they able to carry on on Kauai, or has the filming been postponed, 
> abandoned, etc.?

Jeff Goldblum was on Leno last night (thurs), specifically not saying anything
useful about Jurassic Park.  He said, "there's real dinosaurs here, it's really
amazing... they kept the public away from the dinosaurs so they wouldn't get
hurt."  Master of sarcasm.

He did say that they were holed up in a hotel while Iniki passed, and it was
rather more intense than he expected.

Leno joked that it would disturb people to see pieces of dinosaurs flying
around in the hurricane.

Joel
-- 
jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I want peace on earth, and goodwill towards man."
"We don't do that kind of thing, we're the United States Government!"
  -- from _Sneakers_
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: Computers in Films/TV
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 08:22:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.170355.2606@bvc.edu> johnsonchris@bvc.edu writes:
>Tweekie!  Don't forget Tweekie!

OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu!
OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu!
OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu!
OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu! OGhu!
OGhu! OGhu!  After years of dilligent effort and mental dicipline, I
had finally managed to forget Tweekie.  Now you've ruined everything.

      A
          A
            R
              R
               G
                G
                H
                H
                !
                *
-- 
Reader, suppose you were an idiot.  And suppose you  |  Mike Van Pelt
were a member of Congress.  But I repeat myself.     |  mvp@netcom.com
                -- Mark Twain                        |  mvp@hsv3.lsil.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: marvil@lysator.liu.se (Martin Vilcans)
Subject: Re: Deckard WAS a replicant!
Organization: Lysator Academic Computer Society, Linkoping University, Sweden
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:26:08 GMT

adam@sw.stratus.com (Mark Adam) writes:

>five: with most of the replicants you see their eyes glowing at one point or
>another. even the owl's eyes glowed. this never happened with the humans. there is
>one scene where deckard is behind rachel and both of the are facing the camera...
>lo and behold BOTH of their eyes are glowing.

>of all the 'deckard is a replicant' clues this is the slap in the face.

Yes, that's the one I though was the most obvious "proof" that Deckard was a
replicant. And when the female replicant asked him if he had made the
whatever-its-called test on himself.
From: worthm@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Mike Worth)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Terminator II *flaw*
Date: 8 Nov 92 08:30:36 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


Not to be smug, but I have found a *major* error in T2. Ok, time travel back to
T1, when Michael Beihn says that only living tissue can go through the vortex.
Ok, to how did the T1000 (which is made of liquid metal and went through the
vortex right after the terminator in T1) go through? He should have been 
unable to get through. Think about it.
	-Mikey
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies