HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: walshm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Matt 'MTM' Walsh)
Subject: T-3 plot possibility
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 19:06:39 GMT

T3 is not only a possibility, it's a virtual reality.  There's no way
Hollywood will leave this gold mine alone just because of an ending.

The T1000 may have brought a brain chip back with him and planted it in the
plant.

Plus, its a paradox to think that the Terminators were designed by recovering
their body parts - the effect proceded the cause!  The only story I'll
buy is that the T800 parts they recovered SPED ED UP the research.

I HOPE there's another T3 - movies like this, Star Wars, and Indiana Jones
are disappearing in favor of crappy present day, drama, adult situation,
formulaic HollyCRAPwood productions.
--
Matt Walsh  walshm@clutx.clarkson.edu
614-424-4159 (daytime)
614-538-9427 (after 5 est)
How can you have your pudding if you don't eat your meat? You! Yes You!
From: rcbi27@muvms3.bitnet (DBRUM)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Inept use of the network
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:59:08 GMT
Organization: Marshall University

In article <4807@umriscc.isc.umr.edu>, wdechent@usenet.umr.edu (William L. Dechent) writes:
> Regarding the transmissions about netters not properly starting new threads-
> 
> I changed the subject (or tried to) and deleted all the references as recomm-
> ended by a recent post.  I hope this is enough to prevent problems as de-
> scribed in earlier posts.
> 
> Question:  I see all these posts where a person takes a prior post, and then
> responds by reproducing the prior post, and also inserting comments.  How is
> that done?  I've also seen people take my letters, and reply doing the same
> thing (with the > marks to show what I wrote.)  Could someone describe how
> this is done for all of us who don't know?  Thanks!
> 
> guilty of ignorance, but not malice,
> Larry
> 
> wdechent@clciris.chem.umr.edu

It's called a "followup", Larry. Simply type and Enter "followup"
instead of "post." You'll then see a copy of the news item you
wish to comment on with each line preceeded by the little pointer.
To separate the pointered lines of type to make an insertion, just
hit Return at the end of a line and a space will appear. And you
can delete parts just as you would when editing your own post. Then
just follow usual posting procedure and the subject line will
appear automatically with "Re:" preceeding it. Pretty neat. 'Specially
for us computer neophytes!

--danny 
-- 
	"Were his solid black square paintings really,
	as the artist claimed, simply neutral, abstract
	compositions devoid of external references and
	meanings?" ***********************************
From: orum@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Jeff Orum)
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1992 16:47:49 GMT
Subject: Re: The 64th Annual Academy Award Winners
Organization: HP Information Networks, Cupertino, CA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies

>>Makeup - "Terminator 2: Judgment Day"
>
>	T2 was a great movie, and it really deserved the Best Special Effects
>award, but I think in this category Star Trek VI should have won.

Ah, you mean because of the makeup job they did on William Shatner? :-)
From: epp@mala.bc.ca (Lorne Epp)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: THE GOOD GUY GETS IT (spoiler, obviously)
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:41:17 -0700
Organization: Malaspina College

In article <1992Apr14.082357.6752@maths.tcd.ie>, djohn@maths.tcd.ie (Derek John) writes:
> 
> feeling very cold.Has anyone else got any good examples of a film
> that starts off in the usual way but the good guy gets it?

Have you forgotten NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD  ?
From: bjbartlett@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (The Bart-Man)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Where Indy teaches
Date: 10 Apr 92 16:17:31 GMT
Organization: Miami University Academic Computer Service"


 In article <1992Apr4.171258.18651@midway.uchicago.edu> as16@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>I know this doesn't prove anything, but given the fact that throughout the
>trilogy, various references are made by both Indy and his father to the 
>University of Chicago, it would be a rather strange coincidence to use
>a building from the University of Chicago campus just because they thought
>it was a good looking building                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  That is exactly why they filmed parts of "Little Man Tate" here at Miami 
University!!!  The movie didn't take place here, but they thought the 
buildings looked nice, see they used them.

-Brian
From: margaret@cs.arizona.edu (Margaret Newman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Info on Michael Biehn?????
Summary: Timebomb
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:01:20 GMT


I don't have any information on him, actually.  But I certainly enjoy
him in a movie and the other night on Pay-Per-View I saw a commercial
for a movie called "Timebomb".  He was the main character.  I never
heard of this out at the theaters, so it must of had problems of some
kind.  Anyway, it looked pretty good to me.  He's some regular joe
that evidently was "programmed" to be a killer or something like that.
Some of the other people looked familiar, but I couldn't recall any
name.

He's been in several other movies.  Aliens, Seventh Sign, Terminator...

margaret@cs.arizona.edu
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Monday, 6 Apr 1992 15:49:09 EDT
From: <RHK106@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Who's Spider-Man? and Highlander wanted

Everyone probably knows about the Spider-Man movie that James Cameron is
gonna do but if anyone can find a better actor to play Spider-Man than Keanu
Reeves, you gotta tell me.  He's got the right build, the right Peter Parker
looks and the only minus is the funny way he talks but I'm sure most people
overlook that, Schwarzzenegger talks kinda funny too.

Also, does anyone know where I can get a Highlander poster?  Not the damn
shameful sequal but the original awesome movie.  Perferably one of Kurgan,
my favorite character of all time.

-- The Boys#3

I know Keanu is a Hawaiian name but is the DUDE from Hawaii?  Does anyone
know?
From: luther@i5160e.nrl.navy.mil (Luther)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Info on Michael Biehn?????
Date: 8 Apr 92 11:30:29 GMT
Organization: US Naval Research Laboratory, Acoustics Division


Someone posted a question about Michael Biehn. Every so often, you'll
see an actor that seems to be linked to a director (eg, John Candy / 
John Hughes) -  

Michael Biehn was in Terminator 1 and The Abyss, both directed by 
James Cameron. I seem to remember that he was in yet another Cameron
film (not T2), but I don't know which one - were there others?

He was in Navy Seals, as mentioned in another post.
He was also in The Seventh Sign, with Demi Moore - one of those movies 
that people seem to either really like or really hate.

---------------------------------------------------

" 'Eureka' is Greek for 'This bath is too hot'. "
			- Tom Baker / Doctor Who
	Ken Luther
	Naval Research Lab.
	Washington, D.C. 
	luther@caligula.nrl.navy.mil
---------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Tail Lights
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 13:39:02 GMT

Sam Lowther (slowther@ducvax.auburn.edu) asks if others have noticed that:
> > In a lot of movies ... when one of the main characters is driving in a
> > car that's shown from a long shot, in a large number of cases, said car
> > has one tail light that isn't working.
 
Mikael Karlsson (mikka@sssab.se) suggests:
> The normal tail lights aren't bright enough so the film makers simply 
> switch on the fog tail light. Most cars only have one of those.

Maybe in Sweden (.se) they do, but North American cars don't have them
at all.  And if extra lights are added, they are right-left symmetrical.

I suggest that this is a solution to the problem that cars tend to look
pretty similar from a distance.  It provides a ready marker to enable
the viewer to pick out the car of interest.

I haven't actually noticed it being done with tail lights -- maybe because
I don't watch a lot of the sort of show where cars are shown in long shots
all the time -- but I have seen at least one instance where the same thing
was done with headlights, and that was what I decided was going on.
-- 
Mark Brader			"A hundred billion is *not* infinite
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto		 and it's getting less infinite all the time!"
utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com		-- Isaac Asimov, "The Last Question"

This article is in the public domain.
From: a0s5108@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Neal and Mara Priestly)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Theater Owners (was Re: Plug Pulled on Spike Lee's "Malcolm X")
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:02:39 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <OLIVER.92Apr15185624@coate.mit.edu> oliver@athena.mit.edu (James D. Oliver III) writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.160608.23040@nic.umass.edu> a0s5108@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Neal and Mara Priestly) wrote:
>
>[description of what happens to receipts deleted]
>
>Are you a privately-owned theater or part of a chain?  Woudl there be a
>difference in how a contract would work between the two?
>

A chain theatre.  Third largest chain actually.  I doubt there would be
much differece in the contract for a 'blockbuster' class film, the studios
want to recoup that money (making the film, making payroll, print and TV
advertising, etc.)  If anything, I would suspect that we get a better
deal because you don't want to p*ss off 1600+ screens of chain.

(When "Jedi" came out the same studio I mentioned offended a left coast
chain (Syfuy I think) and didn't get a run on one of thier screens for
about 9 months...)

The studios kind of go with a 'this is the contract take it or leave it
attitude' with films like Batman/Lethal 3 because they can.  If you are
in a situation where the enemy is right across the street you can actually
wind up taking *worse* film terms (the split between what they get and
what you get) if both sites want the film badly enough.

-Neal Priestly
Discliamer:  I speak about my company, not for it.
'What was that middle part?' Kevin Klien, A Fish Called Wanda
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Please help identify a quote
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 8 Apr 92 13:38:06 GMT
Organization: M&E (Division of EDS), Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: holada

In article <92Apr5.212354edt.9047@rock.db.toronto.edu>, fche@db.toronto.edu ("Frank Ch. Eigler") writes:
> Does anyone know where the line
> 
> 	"Jane, you ignorant slut!"
> 

  "Saturday Night Live", during the "Weekend Update" news spoof, specifically
the point/counterpoint take off.




<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com Homo Cyberneticus-Computational Man  |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|    EARLY RESULTS FROM THE NEW YORK PRIMARY!                            |
|    Clinton                                              17%            |
|    Brown                                                22%            |
|    Elvis in the white jumpsuit                          57%            |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From: jas@ISI.EDU (Jeff Sullivan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: ScriptWriter??????
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:30:29 GMT
	<1992Apr10.145133.1@mdcbbs.com>
Organization: USC-ISI
In-reply-to: rivero@mdcbbs.com's message of 10 Apr 92 14:51:33 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.145133.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:

>In article <21105@venera.isi.edu>, jas@ISI.EDU (Jeff Sullivan) writes:
>> In article <sbb1.702606942@Ra.MsState.Edu> sbb1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Shay B. Berthelson) writes:
>> 
>>>I have a bunch of ideas for movie scripts and plays, has anyone ever heard
>>>or seen a program that will help you organize a script.  
>> 
>> There are many.  For the Mac and PC there is Scriptor, which is a
>> post-writing script formatter.  For the PC there is Movie Magic, a
>> dedicated script processor.
>
>If it's the same "Movie Magic" we used at Disney, it's primary purpose
>is to break out a script into budget elements and a shooting schedule.
>It's not really geared to accelerate the writing process itself.

Sorry, mental lapse.  Movie Magic is Screenplay System's
budget/breakdown program.  I mean Movie Master.

jas
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey A. Sullivan		| Senior Systems Pgmr -- with a difference!
jas@venera.isi.edu		| Information Sciences Institute
jas@isi.edu                    	| University of Southern California
From: ccmk@lure.latrobe.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: `Hannibal' movies
Date: 11 Apr 92 11:24:59 GMT
Organization: VAX Cluster, Computer Centre, La Trobe University

In article <1992Apr9.045150.15824@ucc.su.OZ.AU>, joe@archsci.arch.su.oz.au (Joe Nappa) writes:
> Saw "manhunter" last night on Sydney TV. It was interesting to see
> a Thomas Harris story adapted in slightly different way. Michael
> Mann has a style -- bright colours, contemporary music sound-track
> (jarringly loud, sometimes inappropiate but always toe-tapping),
> bright lighting. It was interesting to see that he also gave
> himself a credit as a cameraman -- has any other director had such
> a dual role?

Mann adapted the script and directed.  The Director of Photography was
Dante Spinotti.  (The film was made by the De Laurentiis group, which
explains the large number of Italians in the production crew!).  Mann
was listed as one of the camera operators, which means he held or
operated the camera in some scenes.  This doesn't seem unusual to me.
Almost certainly it was for the hand-held scenes.  Another similar
duality comes to mind for the film A CLOCKWORK ORANGE.  Kubrick
did the hand-held camera work in that during the cat-woman scenes.

> Whereas Demme and his cinematographer went for low
> lighting and subdued/wintery colours Mann brought out his Miami
> Vice colour chart and went to town: his Lecter (inexplicably
> spelt Lecktor in the credits and shown newspaper headlines) wore
> hospital white clothing and lived in a white-walled, white-barred
> cell.

Dolarhyde's name was changed to Dollarhyde too. As you say, inexplicable.
Mann does have a particular style, but it worked for me.  I thought
Lecter's cell in MANHUNTER was far superior to SoTL.  The dungeon-like
cell in SoTL was a little too hard to swallow in a 20thC hospital.  It
made for good shadows, but the intensity of lighting and simplicity of
the cell in MANHUNTER made for starkness, which is what Lecter is -
stark intellect and no humanity.

> There was a reasonable amount of suspense. Harris' decision
> to replace Will Graham with a female raw recruit was inspired:
> you just don't feel as sympathetic to FBI man Will Graham as you
> do to Clarice Starling. SotL is the "better" movie only because
> of the acting talents of Foster and Hopkins. Mann's and Demme's
> direction were equally journeyman-like; they just had different
> views on how to translate the imagery to the screen. Mann made
> less use of Lecter: perhaps he thought that, confined as he was,
> he was just too static for the screen, relying too much on 
> dialogue.

Lecter was in the movie as much as in the book.  I agree Foster and
Hopkins and the superior script in SoTL made it a better movie than
MANHUNTER, but I still think the generally understated and subtle
tone of MANHUNTER made it chilling for better reasons than the more
visceral SoTL.  I wouldn't agree that either director made a "journeyman-
like" fist of it.  Both imbued the film with more than a point-the-camera
effort might have.

Mark Kosten
(ccmk@latrobe.edu.au)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: reiher@onyx.jpl.nasa.gov (Peter Reiher)
Subject: Re: Plug Pulled on Spike Lee's "Malcolm X"
Reply-To: reiher@onyx.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Peter Reiher)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 18:45:48 GMT

In article <204892@unix.cis.pitt.edu> hainer+@pitt.edu (Jon M Hainer) writes:
>
>The argument is over the length of the movie, for two reasons.  Two
>hour movies tend to start at five, seven and nine o'clock.  Three hour
>movies tend to start at five and eight o'clock.  Most movies are two
>hours, thus most people line up at the multiplex theatre at seven and
>nine o'clock.  I think a lot of people, me included, often just show
>up at a large theatre at these times "wanting to see a movie" 
>
>Secondly, there is the myth that people don't like to sit through
>three hour movies.  They get bored.  Just ask anyone who's seen
>"Lawrence of Arabia", "Once Upon a Time in America" or "Dances with
>Wolves". |-)

There's a third reason, which is really more important to those in the
film business.  Think of a movie theater in the most crassly commercial
terms.  If a theater owner can entirely fill a theater of a given 
capacity three times a night instead of two times, and the prices for
the tickets are the same in all cases, clearly he will make more money
with the shorter film.  So it's in the interest of theater owners to
show short films, rather than long ones, all else being equal.  (There
are limits, of course - if you can fit in three shows, but not four, then
the actual length doesn't matter; and most viewers feel cheated if the
film doesn't run at least an hour and a half.)

Filmmakers argue that all things are not equal.  Sometimes, the longer
movie will be more popular than the shorter film.  Once in a while, maybe
you can convince the theatergoers to pay a bit more for the longer film.
But, if one could assign a magic "quality rating" to a film, theater
owners would clearly prefer the a two hour film with a given rating to
a three hour film with the same rating.

One interesting case in point is the Sylvester Stallone film "Cobra".
Supposedly, a fair amount of footage was removed from that film specifically
to ensure that theaters could fit in one extra showing of the film every
day of the opening weekend, in the hopes of boosting its early box office 
totals.  (Since "Cobra" was a turkey, making the money quick was a very wise
strategy, in my opinion.)  The strategy worked, since theaters were
able to sell out their seats six times on a weekend day, instead of 
five.

The opposite happened with "Once Upon a Time In America," though.  It
was cut (in the U.S.) to allow some extra showings (and to make it more
linear).  However, the cuts greatly harmed the film, so a movie that 
might have been a success bombed, instead.  So while studio bosses might
want to make short films, rather than long ones, they are well advised
to be careful about drastically cutting the long ones that they happen
to have made.  "Malcolm X" is likely to be a case in point.

			Peter Reiher
			reiher@onyx.jpl.nasa.gov
			. . . cit-vax!elroy!jato!jade!reiher
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner)
Subject: Re: T2 is crap!
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 01:20:52 GMT

karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen) writes:

>In <madkiwi.702851806@camelot> madkiwi@camelot.bradley.edu (Michael Eade) writes:


>>T-1000, once he has touched a person, can simulate that person and their 
>>voice.  Once he touched Sarah, he would've offed her.  

>Pick one:

>1)

>T-1000 was severly damaged at that point in the movie, thus making it hard
>for him to emulate Sarah's voice 100%.

But T-1000 DID simulate Sarah's voice and it DID attract John.
>2)

>Another reason for not killing Sarah is that T-1000 couldn't lend a feeling
>to his voice emulation, so he needed Sarah to produce a motherly voice.

T-1000 didn't kill Sarah because it hadn't heard Sarah speak so it couldn't 
simulate her voice. But Sarah said "Fuck you." and T-1000 looked like it was 
about to kill Sarah but The Terminator attacked T-1000 with a bar allowing Sarahto escape. 
>"Call John".  He needed Sarah to call John in a convincing way.

>3)

>He didn't have to kill Sarah, it would have been pointless (see below).

>>Much too civilized for a machine that hates humans, don't you think?

>T-1000 didn't hate humans, he killed them if it served his objective(Kill John).
>--

>\Internet:     karlth@rhi.hi.is         \ Karl Thoroddsen University Of Iceland
>  \  UUCP:     ..!mcvax!hafro!rhi!karlth  \      Department Of Computer Science
From: oliver@athena.mit.edu (James D. Oliver III)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Jo Anne Worley
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:03:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: ballard1.OLIVER.92Apr8200344
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <29E3711F.5900@noiro.acs.uci.edu> eabu202@orion.oac.uci.edu (Virany Margaret Kreng) wrote:
> During Beauty and the Beast, I found that the voice of the Wardrobe sounded
> familiar and the credits listed the voice as belonging to Jo Anne Worley (sp?)
> 
> Can anybody tell me what else she might have been in?  Her name sounds familiar
> too but I can't seem to place the face...

Oh, God.  Now I know it's time to retire and collect social security.

She was in "Laugh-In".  And a lot of other TV.  Some Broadway stuff.  Not
much else.

(Please don't tell me you don't know what "Laugh-In" was.)
--
____________________________
	Jim Oliver  
	oliver@athena.mit.edu /	joliver@hstbme.mit.edu
	oliver%mitwccf.BITNET@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: leeper@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Mark R. Leeper)
Subject: Re: hammer
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 01:42:13 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.212557.17921@acsu.buffalo.edu> v101pyrw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Michelle L. Zafron) writes:
> In article <1992Apr15.104126.6158@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, leeper@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Mark R. Leeper) writes...
> >In some cases the
> >films had some sophisticated themes.  In FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED
> >he attempts to save a genius's life by transplanting the brain into
> >another body.  It is not a deformed or monsterous body, just another
> >body.  What goes wrong is basically technology shock.  Neither the
> >patient nor his wife can come to terms with this being the same person
> >if the body looks different.
> 
> A question about this film, I've heard that there is another version not
> shown in America with extra more "violent" footage.  By today's standards,
> that's probably not true anymore, but does anyone know anything about it?

As a matter of fact, I think it just showed on cable (HBO or CINEMAX)
in the last few months.  It was not that it was more violent, but it
had one scene that was cut out.  Apparently once the film was already
in production someone decided to add a scene in which Cushing rapes
Veronica Carlson.  It is totally out of character for Victor
Frankenstein and really did not fit into the film, but the producers
insisted.  Carlson was in tears over the decision.  My guess is that
Cushing was angry about it also, but he has been too professional to
make a statement about it in public.  (Perhaps he does in his
autobiography--actually he wrote two autobigraphies--published in
England a few years ago.  I have not read them yet.)  However, the
next Frankenstein movie they made was HORROR OF FRANKENSTEIN and did
not have Cushing.  Cushing made one more Frankenstein movie,
FRANKENSTEIN AND THE MONSTER FROM HELL, but it was clear his heart
wasn't in it.  Anyway, the rape scene was cut from non-English prints
but did show up in the cable version.  It did not make much of an
impression on me except that I remember thinking it was a better film
without it.  At some point I may go back and watch it again.

				Mark Leeper
				...att!mtgzy!leeper
				(908)957-5619