HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: spice@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: _Space Rangers_
Date: 8 Jan 93 01:31:39 -0500
Organization: Carnegie Mellon Computer Club

In article <1993Jan7.213010.14766@cas.org>, sdr57@cas.org writes:
> In article <C0I0u4.HGu@austin.ibm.com> jlpicard@austin.ibm.com writes:
>>
>>
>>Ouch! Piloting that ship looks _damned_ uncomfortable, lying on
>>your stomach with your arms outstretched and your head raised.
>>
> 
> For what it's worth...
> A number of designs for high speed aircraft included prone pilot
> positions. It can improve acceleration tolerance.

Yes , but those high performance aircraft have the pilots laying on their
backs so that the seat can support their heads and necks. The female
pilot in Space Rangers was lying on her stomach and had no support for
her head or neck. And she had to look upwards at an angle to pilot the
ship. Just how long do you think someone can lie flat on their stomach
and look upwards at a 45 degree or so angle before their neck gets sore?
And dont even think about doing high G maneuvers in that position. Can you
say whiplash? Major spine and neck problems, etc.

                              Scott Corley


spice@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
From: jennise@opus.dgi.COM (Milady Printcap the goddess of peripherals)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Deep Space Nine
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:16:00 GMT



>> First off, who in the Hell approved this name?  Don't they remember Deep
>> Star Six?  Sounds kind of similar, doesn't it?  Hmmm, of course, in quality
>> they're about the same, so...

hehehehehe  

I'm in the San Francisco Bay area....On Sunday (Jan 10) the reran the
premire episode of Deep Space Nine.. Guess what was on just before it.


You got it.  Deep Star Six

I am not lying

**********
By the way my opinion of the premiere episode....eh.

I pulled 'exerpts from the show's bible' off the net a while ago. It
was basically notes from a talk at a convention. It was blatantly
stated that there would be no  talking the bad guys to death in this
show. I wasn't going to be a cerebal as ST:TNG. What happened? We were
treated to a half hour of Sisko talking to an alien. I thought the
show suffered from on the TNG's main (in my opinion) problems. The
writer's don't know what to do when they have a lot of time. So they
wasted it and solved every thing in the last five minutes. The
characters show potential. Being the good soul that I am I'll give it
a few more episodes before I pronounce my final opinion.

Jennise
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: donnell@tuna.micro.umn.edu (BogusMan)
Subject: Re: Lathe of Heaven
Organization: none
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:38:41 GMT

In article <14290001@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates) writes:
>Anyone out there seen the PBS tv movie "Lathe of Heaven" recently?
>
>The last time I saw it was in about 1984 on PBS... 
>
>It was an adaptation of Ursula McGuinn(sp?)'s SF story...
>
>   
>   Thanks.
>

That is Ursula K. LeGuin, and yes, it is a fine adaptation of the book.
Probably the best performance by Bruce Davison since "Willard".
I have it on tape, and It gets played often in my home. What can I say.
Haven't seen it on broadcast in almost a decade.

Now then, does anybody have a copy of the PBS adaptation of John Varley's
"Overdrawn At The Memory Bank"? that was great too!

Pax
					--Judex--
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Grade Report: Space Rangers
From: <JW83HISW@MIAMIU.BITNET>
Date: Friday, 8 Jan 1993 13:25:39 EST
Organization: Miami University - Academic Computer Service

> . . . (Lord knows that V and Space: 1999 weren't the greatest entries
>in science fiction television, but Space Rangers isn't even in their
>class.)

  Space Rangers was *much* superior to Space: 1999.  Not only in terms
of f/x, but acting ability as well.  Jeff Kaake gives the viewer a
sense of command ability to his character.  Martin Landeau looked like
he was sleep walking.  The Japanese actor who portrays Zylyn has a much
greater screen presence then that female Spock-clone on Space: 1999.
Space Rangers is certainly better then that piece of dreck.

  As for V, the two shows are vastly different in style and storyline.
Comparing Space Rangers to V is like comparing The Wrath of Khan to
Dune: the differences are too great to make a comparison with.

  I liked Space Rangers for several reasons:  one is that the way the
show portrays the future as not the pristine postcard that so much of
early sience fiction drew.  There's dirt, sweat, bad things like drugs
and crime.  Obviously, some things have improved - like computers and
medicine, but there is bad to go with the good.

  Also, kudos to the show for not giving us another Data.  The android
Ringer is much more realistic than Data: AI robots may be mechanically
brilliant in the future, but they'll never be anything more than idiot
savants.

  A lot of reviews I've read were complaining about the characters
being too stereiotyped.  Well, point out an original character on TV
these days, please!  Never mind: There aern't any!  The characters in
*all* the Star Treks and any other SF television show are *all* stereo-
types.  Get used to it, sit back, and enjoy!

Jim

========================================================================
"The meek can *have* the earth.  The rest of us are going to the stars!"
 Robert A. Heinlein
========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: QL: 1/5/93 transmission
From: kickstart@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
Date: 6 Jan 93 09:22:56 -0600
Organization: Mankato State University

In article <1ien7dINNo9g@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse) writes:
> 
> In a previous article, rck1@ellis.uchicago.edu (roberta chi-woon kwong) says:
> 
>>During tonight's "A Tale of Two Sweeties," who else's transmission
>>cut out just after the sunrise scene? 
>>
>>Here in Chicago, the interruption lasted perhpas 5 seconds, but
>>I've been reading that other places had static for at least 5
>>*minutes*.
>>
>>Who's fault was this? NBC's? Affiliates'?
> 
> My guess would be NBC's.  Cleveland lost 2-3 minutes, I think.  Wasn't
> keeping time on it.  I was just glad that we missed a little of the
> episode.  The only thing is, to have a complete copy I'm going to have to
> watch that thing again IF it's re-run.

Hey at least you saw parts of it.  KARE 11 (mpls/stpl) pre-empted the show for
what was probably one fo the WORST Timberwolves games I've ever seen!


--------------------------------------/\----------------------------------------
kickstart@vax1.mankato.msus.edu      /\/\  NeXT:  The object is the advantage.
"Christopher P. Josephes"           |\/\/|
Mankato State University             \\//
--------------------------------------\/----------------------------------------
From: jwlr@monet.cc.rochester.edu (James Willer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: What Ever Happened To Max? (Was "Re: SF on TV")
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:43:22 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

>If you mean the Actor who played Max Headroom (I don't know his name),

Matt Freuer (sp?)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: rrheaume@emr1.emr.ca (Roberta Rheaume (CPB))
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Organization: CPCS, Energy Mines & Resources, Canada
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:10:40 GMT

In article <yTiZwB3w166w@hogbbs.scol.pa.us> crunch@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (Travis Prebble) writes:

>Well, I wasn't as disappointed with this show as I was DS9.  As a matter 
>of fact, I rather liked it, perhaps because the characters, while being a 
>bit uncooperative with one another, were BELIEVABLE!  I rather wished 
>they wouldn't have canned the android quite so quickly (of course, if 
>he'd been around much longer, he would have fixed everything in the damn 
>station). =)


I can't believe you liked Space Rangers better than DS9.  I turned off space 
rangers to watch Wonder Years, it was so bad.  The acting was terrible, 
esp. Linda Hunt, she was awful.  I felt she was reading her lines and not 
interacting with anyone.  The only thing I liked was the guy with all the 
metal parts, he seemed like a William Bendix character out of WWII 
movies and I like those kind of movies.  I hated the constant talk about 
budget cuts.  Maybe they were talking about the rotten budget for the series 
and that was why it was so awful.

IMHO I think it won't last to the end of the season.
 
Just my opinion, (no flames please)

Roberta Rheaume
rrheaume@emr1.emr.ca
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: Catherine.Collingwood@launchpad.unc.edu (Catherine Collingwood)
Subject: Re: DS9:I liked it, dammit.
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 01:36:26 GMT

In article <16B50E5A8.GGPERRY@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU> GGPERRY@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU (ggreg) writes:
>what are ya afraid of criticism or something?  some of us just demand quality
>sf, not puerile juvenile space opera.  i mean, why are there no real sf writers
>on these ST shows?  why don't they spend some of those millions of dollars on
>some decent writers?  i hear that BABYLON 5 has harlan ellison as script
>editor, and william gibson among others as writers.  now, theres a concept,
>using SF writers  to write SF tv!  hello star trek, hello!?!?

if you look at the credits for ST:TNG, the story consultant is Melinda
Snodgrass (and has been since the 1st season)...she wrote one of (IMO)
the best TOS books...The Tears of the Singers...maybe you just want to see
big name authors and don't realize that there are lots of very good SF
writers out there who aren't "big names."  The script idea for STIV was
also partially developed from a writers' conference.
Sorry, you're inaccurate about ST not using SF writers.  They have done it
for years.
>and no, i'm not comparing STNG to the old one.  just judging it on it's own
>merits, which is quite unfair to it, i know....

actually, I like STTNG.  The old series sometimes got trite and seemed to over-
advocate WASP morals to me.  While TNG is still noticably while male Anglo
Saxon at least it's making some strides in all areas but the treatment of
women.  And if it's so awful, why is it still among the top three syndicated
shows?
>>
>>Yes, I enjoyed DS9.

I did too.  I wasn't sure from the comercials and promo stuff I saw but it
strikes me as extremely good and a fitting addition to the Star Trek family.

>>I thought the show did an excellent job of developing
>>several very complex characters, though  many of you appear to feel
>>that they are all rip-offs of someone-or-another.
>>
>>I noticed that most of the postings regarding
>>DS9 were fairly whiny and very often were written by people who are
>>STILL crying about how ST:TNG isn't as good as the original.  Get
>>a grip, guys.  No one is forcing you to watch.

that's right.  With x number of networks off cable and all the oodles
on, no one is forcing you to watch it.  You're entitled to your opinion
but, for crying out loud, didn't your parents teach you not to say anything
at all if you couldn't say anything nice?

Lady Firebird
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: buc@world.std.com (Quantum Buc)
Subject: Re: ST: SHEEP SHIT CRIME
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 20:02:45 GMT

Sooo, uhhhh, did'ja like it?
-- 
        Quantum Buc                  >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> INTERNET:    buc@world.std.com   "Oh   v
^      "Let the pigeons loose!"       COMPUSERVE:  71034,2464          Boy!" v
 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
From: eek2@po.CWRU.Edu (Eric E. Katz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: SF on TV
Date: 11 Jan 1993 21:08:04 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


I suppose the problem with people not likely Max Headroom had to 
do with the fact that there were not a lot of science fiction 
elements.  It did not make up any gobbley-gook about non-linea
time, but instead took a current situation and brought it to its
strangest 17 or so years in the future.  When I watch m
collection of MH shows, I see the stops we are trying to go 
through in the 90s to avoid what happens in MH's world.
From: CRAIG@MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Ed Craig)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Computer Effects (Was Re: Space Rangers !!Spoilers (I
 guess)!!)
Date: 8 Jan 93 19:43:26 GMT


    I should turn on my TV sometime before Space Rangers bites the dust.
    All I can say is that it wasn't special effects which hooked so many
on Star Trek (Old Generation) in the first place. It was the writing. It
was the writing, once in a while some good acting, and the writing.
    (Not that the effects were BAD for the day, but it was contemporary
with _2001,_A_Space_Odyssey_ after all).

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Craig                                         CRAIG@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
My opinions and M.I.T.'s occasionally coincide. Occasionally they don't.
    Neither of us worries about it.
    "We are forces of chaos and anarchy.
         Everything they say we are... We are...
              And we are very proud of ourselves!"
                                       Paul Kantnor
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: scoile@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Steve Coile)
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Va.
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 18:31:05 GMT

Anyone else reminded by the title of this show of the cartoon "Galaxy
Rangers", of a few years back?  Now *there* was a great sci-fi cartoon, and
it had some *great* music!

-Steve
From: eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: NBC's Lamest QL Promo Yet
Date: 12 Jan 1993 13:23:50 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, finifter@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Tracy E. Finifter) says:

>
>
>What are these people doing to QL?  I just saw the promo for tomorrow night's
>episode where they bill Sam as:
>
>He's been many people, done many things, but now he has to come between his
>daughter and a speeding bullet.  He's SUPERMOM!
>
>
>Oh, please.

Disgusting, isn't it?  And it has absolutely nothing to do with the
episode.  Liberation, at least to read, is a good episode.  Anybody get the
idea that NBC is trying to kill QL?


-- 
             Beth Hlabse    eah4@po.CWRU.Edu     Assistant Sysop
                The Science Fiction and Fantasy Sig (GO SCIFI)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If all the beasts were gone man would die from a great lonliness of the spirit.
From: kuchar@buast7.bu.edu (Tom Kuchar)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: DS9: waht about this?
Date: 12 Jan 93 18:26:45 GMT
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <16B549CE4.GGPERRY@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU> GGPERRY@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU (ggreg) writes:
>why did the cardassians leave their station to the federation to discover
>all their technology and secrets?  how come they didn't blow it up or
>just move it, like they did in that lousy premiere?  why would they just
>leave it behind?  is there a logical reason for this, or is it just the usual
>ST half assed realism within the context of their own created universe?


It was a Bajoran designed (and assumed owned, as mentioned by O'Brien
in the pilot) space station occupied by the Cardassians during their
subjugation of Bajor.



-- 
Tom Kuchar			  
kuchar@buast7.bu.edu		  -or-                      kuchar@plh.af.mil
Department of Astronomy                              Phillips Laboratory/GPOB
Boston Univerity		                                  Hanscom AFB
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: lawson%ssdvax.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com (Jim Lawson)
Subject: Re: Highlander in LA?
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 14:26:56 GMT
Organization: MDSSC-SSD
Reply-To: Lawson%ssdvx1.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

I believe I saw it listed late Sunday night on channel 5 or 9, I've not
looked recently to see if it's still on though.

Hope this helps !

Jim

--
Jim Lawson	Lawson%ssdvx1.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
		Alt:	Lawson@netsun.mdc.com or Lawson@bbs.ug.eds.com

Opinions/Comments expressed here are my own and no one elses !!
From: eek2@po.CWRU.Edu (Eric E. Katz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: DS9: waht about this?
Date: 12 Jan 1993 21:53:06 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


About the Cardassians leaving their space station for the
Federation to claime, why didn't they have a self-destruct
triggered from remote.  Knowing the way the Cardassians are, it
could have been very beneficial for them to blow up the space
station from the inside at any time especially when the Enterprise
was docked there.  In the state of disrepair that the space 
station was, there is no way that anyone would have had the time
to find the device and everything else messed up.  I mean, the
food replicator was not working.
From: perez@andromeda.rutgers.edu (William Perez)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: The Dream Science Fiction Channel
Date: 8 Jan 93 06:33:50 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

ror1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Richard O. Rouse III) writes:
>saying "But, there isn't enough out there!"  Bullshit.  
>Below is my own monday through friday DREAM schedule.  This will never 
>happen due to the current rights to the various shows, but just think what

>7:00  Thundar the Barbarian, Space Ghost

Definitely!  I love these... how about the Fantastic Four or SuperFriends?

>11:00 Dr. Who  (approx 4 episodes, as shown on PBS currently, @2 hours)

Yes but PBS shows them one a week.  I love Dr Who to death but they could
be spread out a bit.  Hey, originally they were shown an episode a week!

>1:00  The Prisoner  (who cares if there are only 10/11 episodes, just show em
>		     again and again)

This sort of defeats your point.  Maybe once a week?

>7:00  Star Trek, The Next Generation

I'm all for this but is it feasable?        

>9:00  The Outer Limits >10:00 The Twilight Zone

These should definitely be there... aren't they?

>11:00 Ray Bradbury Theatre,   Red Dwarf
>12:00 Blake's 7  ,  1:00  British SF hour
>      (alternate runs of HHGTTG, UFO, Avengers, Saphire and Steel)

NOW we're talking!  There is some brilliant British SF I discovered
recently!  There's so much Blake's 7 and I had never given it a chance
before... I'm hooked!  and oh!  Saphire and Steel is amazing!  I saw the
first two stories this summer in England (it's out on tape finally!).
The first story SPUN ME OUT!  I haven't been affected like that since I
first saw Dr Who.  The second story was a bit too long but still VERY
SPOOKY and well done.  I've never seen the Avengers (I'm in love with
Johanna Lumley (sp?) now - she is WICKED in the new comedy ABSOLUTELY
FABULOUS with the French & Saunders team...  I miss Tracey Ullman tho)

>Of course, this is assuming they don't butcher the shows.  I kill the first 
>Now, not everyone may like all of this line up, but I think most people
>can respect it.  Sci-Fi could be doing a damn better job.  

So why don't we all write to the channel and petition!        
Give me the address... I don't even have the channel yet!

WILL-E
-- 
perez@andromeda.rutgers.edu (William Perez)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: sdr57@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: The SciFi Channel stinks !! (was: Re: Does SciFi Channel cut episodes????)
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:46:35 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.151201.7744@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> xrcjd@mudpuppy.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles J. Divine) writes:
>
>The biggest problem I find with the Sci-Fi channel is the lack of original
>production.
>
>The only new thing I've seen on the channel was an unbelievably bad TV movie
>called Homewrecker.  After the first five minutes -- when a rocket shot down
>a clearly civilian airplane (where was the range safety officer and the abort
>button?) -- I was disgusted.
>
The SciFi Channel has promised to produce a new movie every month
eventually. Hopefully, later movies will get better. A new channel
doesn't have a lot of money to throw around, so I'm not surprised
the first movie was bad - although I haven't seen it, so I'm just
taking the poster's word on quality. Of course, even rich companies
produce bad movies - remember, at least 90% of everything is junk -
If they give us two good movies a year, I'll be well satisfied.
Perhaps you are willing and able to finance some original programming?
(I'm willing, but not able - I just don't have a spare million.) If so,
I'll bet they would be willing to work with you.

>If all the Sci-Fi channel is going to do is show bad reruns and atrocious TV
>movies, I'd wish they go away and give up the transponder to someone who might
>make some good use of it.
>
>
Sounds fair - who do you propose? Remember how long it took to get
this channel up and running? Finding support was hard - there weren't
a lot of people willing to gamble on there being support for a 24 hour-
a-day science fiction channel. If you know of someone who can and will
do it better, I'll switch to them in a heartbeat. If you want to clear
the transponder for another home shopping channel, then I'm agin' it.

For better or worse, the SciFi channel is it right now. If they
succeed, there will be imitators - and competition will force
quality up. If they fail, it will be a long time before we see
anything like it again. (And, in the topsy-turvy world of the
entertainment industry, its failure might convince people that
"interest in science fiction has peaked and is declining, so
let's hold off on those expensive movies and make another
funniest home video clone instead.")

******************************************************************************
Renegade academician. They're a dangerous breed when they go feral,
academics are...a chemist, too.
		    -(James P. Blaylock in "Lord Kelvin's Machine")

My organization hasn't agreed with any of my opinions so far, and
I doubt they'll start now.

Stanley Roberts

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: flip@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Phillip D. Russell)
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 05:31:58 GMT

In article <yTiZwB3w166w@hogbbs.scol.pa.us> crunch@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (Travis Prebble) writes:
>Well, I wasn't as disappointed with this show as I was DS9.  As a matter 
>of fact, I rather liked it, perhaps because the characters, while being a 
>bit uncooperative with one another, were BELIEVABLE!  I rather wished 
>they wouldn't have canned the android quite so quickly (of course, if 
>he'd been around much longer, he would have fixed everything in the damn 
>station). =)

Yeah I agree.

I was hoping that they would keep him around and use him. After all, it'd
be nice to have a "bulletproof" ranger on the team. 8-)

I was waiting for Doc to "fix" him so he wouldn't be so much of a pain.

Flip


-- 
    __@  __@        Phillip "Flip" Russell  | Purdue University
  _-\<, -\<,_       flip@sage.cc.purdue.edu | West Lafayette, IN
 (_)/---|/-(_)      The important things...
		  My bikes and my Macintosh