HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: krisk@Apple.COM (Kris Kreutzman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Wizards and Star Wars
Date: 25 Jul 92 01:38:36 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

uhschreg@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Ulrich Schreglmann) writes:

>>I also saw the preview while waiting for Wizards.  It was the
>>second time I saw the movie and had sneaked a tape recorder in to capture
>>the audio.

>You did what? Then do You smuggle in Your camcorder by now? Sheesh!
>(Eh! Maybe that's how video pirates do it.)

Naw.  Just the audio.  But I did watch an 8th generation bootleg copy of
the Star Wars trilogy before they were for sale on video.  The quality was
VERY bad.  If you didn't know what was going on you didn't see anything but
blurry color smears. :-\  But after watching 8 hrs of video (SW + Indiana
Jones) EVERYTHING was blurry.

>May the Cool be with You!

>(C)OOL mcmxcii

Be Cool(tm) man!
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: fuller@athena.cs.uga.edu (James P. H. Fuller)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Dune
Date: 28 Jul 92 14:28:07 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

jerd@uow (jerd) writes:

>	I would love to see the 3 hour TV version, but i don't think it has ever
> been on aus tv and so there is not much hope of seeing it until it is 
> shown.

     You aren't missing anything.  It had the same good points the theater
release had (some neat sets, mostly) but the exposition and continuity still
weren't there -- you still had to have read the book to follow it correctly.
Worst of all it still had Kyle MacL. as the Beaver, I mean as Paul.  No matter
*how* you re-edit it you'll never get past that one.  (Waitaminnit here --
how about a version of _Dune_ with *no reference whatever* to Paul Atreides?
Is it ... gasp ... *thinkable*?)
                                                  -- jf


| James P. H. Fuller, Research Coordinator     Soil/Water Biology Laboratory |
|                                              Institute of Ecology          |
| work: fuller@athena.cs.uga.edu               University of Georgia         |
| home: (crom2 rejoins the bitstream one day)  Athens, GA U.S.A.             |
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Close Encounters ending sucked (was: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies)
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:39:14 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH


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.
-- 
    Brice Dowaliby         |    I may speak fluently, but 
(bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu)  |    I don't speak for Fluent
From: scavanag@neumann.une.edu.au (Steven Cavanagh)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: ALIENS- mysterious marine.
Date: 21 Jul 92 03:37:58 GMT


Just after Apone says his "we gonna go in, and we gonna conquer, and
we gonna kick some" bit, the camera follows the marines running out
to join the line up. Just before you see Frost handing out the M41As
there is a marine who puts on his helmet and runs off to the left. I'm
pretty sure I know the marines better than most, but I don't recognise
this guy. He looks older than the others. Who is he?


_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
                                |
Steven Cavanagh                 |        So many women-
(Cav)                           |
                                |                      -So little charisma.
scavanag@neumann.une.oz.au      |
                                |
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien 3
Date: 22 Jul 92 09:15:47 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <fmonro.711763399@neumann.une.edu.au>, by fmonro@neumann.une.edu.au (F J Monro):
> If it's convincing for ants, bees and termites, some of the most succesful
> species on earth, why not for aliens? Alien^3 showed that the alien queen
> has a method of producing another, which is all terrestrial insects need to
> survive. So, why not for aliens?

Now tell me how the queen produces another if you kill the queen.
Anyhow, I said I wouldn't talk about Alien 3.

> So your conclusion is -- A hive which must be nuked from orbit, "it's the 
> only way to be shure" is easy to kill?

Much easier than single reproducing Aliens spread over the face of the
planet.
-- 
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
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:58:51 -0400 
From: Louis Blair <lb2e+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
	<1992Jul21.104715.3221@ifi.unizh.ch>

>Where are the "artsy" movies?
>( Solaris, The man who fell to earth... )

Every few months a thread starts as or evolves
into name-your-favorite-sf-films.  Just to save
some time, here is the list that was generated the
last time that this happened:

The Abyss
The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension
Akira
Alien
Alien Nation
ALIENS
Alphaville
Andromeda Strain
Back to the Future
Barbarella
Battle Beyond the Stars
Beast from 20,000 Fathoms
Bladerunner
Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure
The Birds
A Boy and His Dog
Brazil
Bride of Frankenstein
The Brother From Another Planet
Charly
A Clockwork Orange
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Colossus, the Forbin Project
Dark Star
The Day the Earth Stood Still
Demon Seed
Destination Moon
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1932)
Dr. Strangelove
Dreamscape
The Empire Strikes Back
Escape from New York
E.T.
Farenheit 451
The Fantastic Voyage
Five Million Years to Earth
The Fly (original)
The Fly (Cronenberg)
Forbidden Planet
Frankenstein
The handmaid's Tale
The Hidden
Highlander
Honey, I Shrunk the Kids
The Hunt for the Red October
The Incredible Shrinking Man
Invaders from Mars (1953)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (original)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (new)
The Invisible Man (1933)
The Island of Lost Souls
King Kong (1933)
The Last Starfighter
The Lathe of Heaven
Logan's Run
Lost Horizon
Mad Max
Mad Max -Beyond the Thunderdome
The Man in the White Suit
The Man Who Fell to Earth
Metropolis
Metropolis - the Georio Moroder version
Modern Times
Morons from Outer Space
Mysterious Planet
1984
Oh God
On the Beach
Outland
Plan 9 from Outer Space
Planet of the Apes
The Power
Predator
The Quatermass Conclusion
The Quiet Earth
QUINTET
Repo Man
The Return of the Jedi
The Road Warrior
Robocop
ROLLERBALL
The Running Man
SILENT RUNNING
Slaughterhouse Five
Sleeper
Solaris
Soylent Green
Spaceballs
Star Trek I
Star Trek II
Star Trek III
Star Trek IV
Star Trek V
Star Wars
Starman
Superman
Superman II
The Terminator
Terminator II : Judgement Day
Them!
They Live
The Thing (Carpenter)
Things to Come
This Island Earth
THX1138
Time After Time
The Time Machine
Total Recall
Tron
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
2001: A Space Odyssey
2010
Village of the Damned
War of the Worlds
Westworld
When Worlds Collide
Wizards
Zardoz
From: tnt@netcom.com (Terry Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: sourcebook of SF movies/TV shows
Date: 29 Jul 92 21:13:42 GMT
Organization: Watch the Skies

In article <16832EC2F.UCPL040@UNLVM.UNL.EDU> UCPL040@UNLVM.UNL.EDU writes:


       -Is there a second edition of this book?
       -Does a book exsist which lists SF movies and TV shows (no matter
	how short -- or bad!) ever produced by any studio (no matter how
	small or low budget?

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. my only complaints are that it does not give 
music credits and its listing of format (scope/flat/1.33) are not 
reliable.

it does give all other important credits and a synopsis/review of 
each movie. these are of course personal and some may find them 
irritating. 

i swear by it. i wish i could find a newer edition.
-- 
terry
	tnt@netcom.com
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:6038 rec.arts.sf.starwars:4745
From: tmkst6+@pitt.edu (Theodore M Kostek)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.sf.starwars
Subject: Re: Who is the Bad Guy in E.T.?
Date: 27 Jul 92 19:50:57 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.movies
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Jul27.171218.7762@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>
>Oh, and here's another topic: Is Star Wars anti-scientific?  I would claim so.
>(Turn off your computer, use the force....)
>--
>Hi! Ani mutacia shel virus .signature. Ha`atek oti letoch .signature shelcha!
>
>Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
>     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)

Well, I've tried to start similar threads before and they all seem to have 
died, but I'll bite.

I don't think that saying the trilogy is anti-scientific or anti-technology
is really quite accurate.  I think that what Lucas is really trying to do
is to give us some way of seeing how we can have both at once.  Or maybe
he's trying to show that the technology is not the important thing, but
that people are.  One the one hand we have the Empire with the Death Star;
a wholly technological device whose scope makes individuals dwindle to
irrelance.  Also, look at the name: this is a man-made version (mockery) of 
a natural occurance. 

On the other is the Alliance with a bunch of one man fighters.  The 
difference in scale and importance of the individual is striking.  
I think in the Rebellion we see an organization much more 
devoted to the indivual.

Also, look at the Jedi: they are the main 'priests'(?), users(?), 
symbols(?) of the Force and yet they use lightsabers - a highly 
technical device.  But they keep technology in it's proper place
and perspective.  

I think that movies aren't about anti-science or anti-technology, but
about the 'proper' uses of science/technology, and the relationship 
between that and life/people.


But all of this is IMHO.  


		TEd
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
From: zerobeat@intacc.uucp (Ferenc Szabo)
Subject: Re: _NEUROMANCER_ movie?
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 04:44:38 GMT
Organization: Inter/Access' Matrix BBS

In article <1992Jul16.222347.1267@ee.ryerson.ca> lfernand@ee.ryerson.ca (luis fernandes) writes:
>>... I'm wondering whether there is any work being done on a movie 
>> adaption of _NEUROMANCER_, or ever has been, ...
>
In the early/mid 80's, I had heard that DEVO was slated to do the soundtrack
for Neuromancer.  Needless to say, the movie was nixed by the studio for
reasons unknown to me.

I like DEVO a lot, especially pre 1983, but after hearing Mark Mothersbaugh's
work on the pretty lame Mann & Machine I hope he doesn't score anything
else.  He did a damn fine job on Pee Wee's Playhouse though.

ferenc
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 04:46:05 -0500
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

  " Good and evil are never so cut and dried as you would like to believe."

  Good and evil are "cut and dried" it is just that we are all evil and
some of us are not trying very hard to be good. But as for your example of
"The Gulf War" I think that you are right about how view point is shaped by
which side one is one.
  We kill tens of thousands of Iraqes they only kill a hand full of us.
Perhaps Bakshi is tying to show just how dirty we all are.
----
ProLine:  rfletcher@pro-smof
Internet: rfletcher@pro-smof.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher
ARPA:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher@nosc.mil
From: STDN%MARIST@VM.MARIST.EDU (Dan Newcombe)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Star Trek VII??
Date: 22 Jul 1992 10:30:43 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

>Didn't he get enough during TOS? Is Shatner not "getting any" in real
>life so now he has to ruin Star Trek just for the illusion that he is?
>Oh, they are also reconsidering the "Academy Days" idea that we thought

My roommate says that he won't see another Star Trek movie unless the
whole cast gets killed.  I wanna see someone get killed.  It won't
be Spock(again) cause he is in TNG.  Also, Kirk with a romance...
Oh no, not again.   But what is the Academy plot, I missed that one,
could someone repost it.

  Thanks
   -Dan
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Date: 24 Jul 92 13:28:05 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH


in article <3456@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:

>SF:  Crusher Joe; one helluva space opera and their ships even try to
>obey the laws of physics (watching space combat with the wierd twists and
>turns that attitude jets create is dizzying)... I rate this even over 
>Star Wars as space opera.

What's a Crusher Joe?

>GUNDAM -- The Zeta Gundam sequence and  Char's Counterattack.
>If you like to add psionics to your space opera, this is perhaps as good as
>it could ever get.

What's a GUNDAM?
-- 
    Brice Dowaliby         |    I may speak fluently, but 
(bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu)  |    I don't speak for Fluent
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Who is the Bad Guy in E.T.?
Date: 23 Jul 92 21:26:33 GMT
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.

In article <BD.92Jul23131956@fluent.UUCP> bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU writes:
>I didn't save it, so I can't quote directly, but in the second
>of the "David Brin" posts he says that one of his favorite tricks
>is to ask audiences who the bad guy in E.T. was.
>...
>Clearly, on the surface (seen from the kid's view of the world, that
>is), the big guys (mostly the scientists) were supposed to be the bad
>guys and that clearly is not what Brin was talking about.

The bad guy in the movie is the kid.
--
Hi! Ani mutacia shel virus .signature. Ha`atek oti letoch .signature shelcha!

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
From: gcastlem@mipos2.intel.com (Glenn Castleman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Solaris (Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies)
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:18:47 GMT
Reply-To: gcastlem@mipos2.UUCP (Glenn Castleman)
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.movies
Organization: Microprocessor Component Group, Intel Corp., Santa Clara, CA

|> >> Where are the "artsy" movies?
|> >> ( Solaris, The man who fell to earth... )
|> >
|> >Yes, I'd gladly exchange Invasion of the Body Snatchers for Solaris.
|> >"Dark Star" is missing as well (not artsy, but a must in the top 10).
|> >Personally, I would also put Zardoz somewhere in there (though I guess
|> >hardly anybody will agree with me).
|> >-- 
|> >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
|> 
|> 

Speaking of Solaris...what's the general concensus?  I've seen about 3/4
of it (haven't found time for the last part) and find it to be a thouroughly
'odd' film.  I don't have any problem reading the subtitles (though some of
them go by pretty quickly).  The direction is interesting including some of
the camera shots (trying to make it look like the camera is not present).

Someone called it the '2001' of Russia.  I agree it has the same kind of
'feel', but I think it's on a different level (not higher or lower, just
different).

So whadda ya think?  Someone wanna give me their views of it?

Peabody

************************************************************************
* Batman Returns: "Sorry," replied the laundromat clerk, "I don't care *
*                  WHO you are, pal...No sales slip, no refund."       *
************************************************************************
!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&!@#$%^&
@                      | The test of a first rate intelligence is the       ^
# Glenn C. Castleman   | ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at       %
$                      | the same time and still retain the ability to      $
From: AR402004@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU (Steven Feldman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: 4th OUTER LIMITS Marathon on TNT Saturday Night!
Date: 23 Jul 92 02:36:50 GMT

Dear People,
     On Saturday, July 25th, the Ted Turner-owned cable station TNT will
air its 4th OUTER LIMITS Marathon.  Note that TNT will be showing nine
episodes uncut in 65 min. slots (the added 5 mins. is to allow for the
few minutes longer running time that old shows had).  Here's the
schedule that appeared in my local cable guide:

 8:00pm  "The Man with the Power"
 9:10pm  "The Borderland"
10:15pm  "The Premonition"
11:20pm  [not specified in my cable guide]
12:25am  "The Galaxy Being"
 1:30am  "The Children of Spider County"
 2:35am  "It Crawled Out of the Woodwork"
 3:40am  "Keeper of the Purple Twilight"
 4:45am  "The Brain of Colonel Barham"

     By the way, "Keeper of the Purple Twilight" features a character
very much like Mr. Spock on STAR TREK: a coldly logical alien with
pointy ears who has trouble understanding humans . . . and this was in
*1965*, folks!
     For those with cable who get TNT, enjoy!  8)

Steven Feldman ^ ^ Member of Anime Hasshin (POB  ^ ^ ^ ^ ^  ________ ^ ^
80 Forest St.  ^ ^ 391036; Cambridge, MA 02139-  ^ ^ ^ __---        ---_
Providence, RI ^ ^ 1036), Hokubei Anime-kai (POB ^ ^  -             _   \
02906-2630 USA ^ ^ 279; Botsford, CT 06404), and ^ ^ |           /_/ \  |
(401) 521-2523 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ College Hill Anime. ^ ^_-      __/_// __ |/
BITNET: ar402004@brownvm ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ -     (|/ '()` <()/ ^
INTERNET: ar402004@brownvm.brown.edu ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^  \_   O        .> | ^
HAYAO MIYAZAKI DISCUSSION GROUP: nausicaa@brownvm  ^  /--_/  -__ -- /  ^
<*> Address for subscribing: listserv@brownvm <*>  ^ ^ ^ ^ ^   ---   ^ ^
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Date: 24 Jul 92 00:58:24 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

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.  ...
|
|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.

? HOW?  I mean even the advertizing trailers should have tipped them off!
Gad's, I knew it wasn't *serious* before I stepped into the theatre!
[Not that I'm a rabid fan, mind you, but I *did* enjoy it - of course
I am constitutionally incapable of being a rabid fan of anything]

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
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: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:26:11 GMT

Louis Blair <lb2e+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Later we see that the child has been born (room for a sequel there) and not 
>killed (as far as I could tell anyway), but it is not clear whether or not the
>evil wizard has decided to spare the child or simply has not gotten around to 
>killing it yet.  I'm not sure why Kaufman thinks that the child was dead in 
>the later scene.  Perhaps I missed something.

Kaufman here. (Louis, you can even call me Michael.;->) It's been a while since 
I saw the film (which I really liked, btw), but I thought that the child was 
dead from the way the mother was acting. As I remember it, she was holding the 
baby and crying about all the death - didn't she say something like lovers 
killing lovers, <family member> kiiling <other family member> - and it seemed 
to me that the reason she was so upset was because her child had just been 
killed. It's possible that I am wrong about this, but why do you think she was
so upset?

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: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Who is the Bad Guy in E.T.?
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:48:14 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: na
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH


in article <3637@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp+@pitt.edu (Ryk E Spoor) writes:

>	Scientists are all a bunch of psychotics who will gladly dissect
>any alien that lands here without so much as a how-de-do.
>
>	The Military/Government are EEEEEVIL and will do anything to
>cover up such a landing, help the psychotic Scientists get hold of
>the Harmless Alien, and use anything they learn to Destroy The World (tm).

I think this is a superficial reading of the movie.  It was shot from
Eliott's point of view, for the most part.  The adults were all tall and
distorted.

But the actions of the scientists didn't seem eveil, although I can see why
from Eliott's point of view they might seem bad.  I think you have
overly identified with Eliott, and were unable to look at the scientists
from an impartial point of view.  They didn't do anything wrong.

>E.T. was an anti-intellectual piece of trash. Cute, but definitely trash.

I think you brought too much to the movie, in some ways seeing the movie
you expected to see and not the one that was on the screen.  Although
it was certainly not an intellectual movie, I didn't see anything
there that I would call anti-intellectual.

Next question - why am I defending a piece of fluff like E.T.?  I haven't
the slightest idea...
-- 
    Brice Dowaliby         |    I may speak fluently, but 
(bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu)  |    I don't speak for Fluent
From: fmonro@neumann.une.edu.au (F J Monro)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien 3
Date: 21 Jul 92 11:14:44 GMT

mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:

>whichever way it works.  Really great, you have a planet with Aliens
>running loose, you kill one of them, and they're history, for all
>practical purposes.  Really consistent with the idea of creatures
>optimized for survival.  Ha.

Why not look at it the other way around? With only one alien needing 
the ability to reproduce, the others are free to specialize in defence
or what ever. It means the lives of these aliens are totally expendable,
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.

Then you have to kill the queen...

-Che Monro			aka fmonro@neumann.une.edu.au
	"reverse the polarity of the neutron flow.."