HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sdr57@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 21:52:25 GMT

In article <1ii4qpINNeg1@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> holland@geop.ubc.ca writes:
>
>Space Rangers, on the other hand, did not impress me at all.  The characters were
>cliches, as was the plot.  Intergalactic drug wars?  This was truly painful to
					  ^^^^^^^^^
Actually, I felt that this was about the best thought-out part of the
show.

Drugs are one of the few things for which the price/weight ratio
would be sufficiently high to justify their manufacture in space.
(This is true now.)

If you had a narcotic which was a natural product, it would probably
be one of the few things worth smuggling. Useful drugs would be
worth transporting - in fact, ships might be built to transport drugs
with any additional cargo going along for the ride, as it were.

Drugs have had major effects historically - consider the Opium Wars.
Given that the space rangers inhabit a piece of a universe in
which (1) aliens exist and (2) humans rule (there seemed to be
no aliens of significant rank in the rangers), an alien empire
might plausibly be manufacturing a drug and distributing it to
destabilize the human-dominated ranger society, or a criminal
underclass consisting mainly of (possibly - or probably - discriminated
against) aliens might be manufacturing such a drug in a protected
portion of space (some planet analogous to the Golden Triangle)
and smuggling it out for monetary gain. If some thought is given
to fleshing out the background, this show could blossom.

For a view of the concept of future drug wars, you might try a
little known book entitled "Dune" which may be available in the
science fiction section of your local library. Although the drug
in this case is a state monopoly, the book suggests some ways in
which a drug might become of major importance in a future society.

******************************************************************************
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
From: bh419@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ted B Samsel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Date: 8 Jan 1993 12:57:10 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Hell, ya wanna watch re-runs of MURDER SHE WROTE instead? Look,
nobody is going to agree. Atleast there is something besides
Trek dreck.

"never date a trekkie, you'll be sorry"
-- 
Ted....
From: noah@cad.gatech.edu (Noah White)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: DS9 was very BAD
Date: 7 Jan 1993 23:37:49 -0500
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: cae.cad.gatech.edu
Summary: it sucked
Keywords: bbbaaaaadddd


    I saw the DS9 premier yesterday and to make a long story short, it sucked. It
was riddled with incosistancies and contardiction. For instance when Commander Sisko
is captured by the aliens they threaten to kill him, yet later on the aliens say they
have no comprension of death. Also if these aliens are in a non-linear dimension (in
terms of time) it would be impossible for them to coexist with a creature from a linear
time dimension. It would be sort of like us being able to see a _true_ 2 dimentional
object. There are no such things as all matter as we know it exists in 3 dimensions.
The only part I did like was the beginning battle scenes, the rest was trash and so was
the acting.

		
-- 
Noah White                                       Internet: noah@cad.gatech.edu
CAE/CAD Lab Staff & USENET Administrator
Georgia Institute of Technology
"Wheel in the sky keeps on turin. Oh I don't know where I'll be tomarrow."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: GGPERRY@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU (ggreg)
Subject: ST: SHEEP SHIT CRIME
Organization: Northwestern University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:34:45 GMT

first off, who in the hell approved this name?  don't they remember
deep star six?  sounds kinda similar, doesn'tit?  hmmm....of course,
in quality they're about the same, so..........
i thought this show was supposed to be different and darker than the
NEXT PENETRATION. oh look, it's the petulant child character, oh look,
it's a female version of riker, oh look, more bad, unimaginative makeup
designs, oh look, more overkill light refraction optical effects.  boy,
it sure is different.  and the same producers too?  hm....... you know,
if i was going to do a spinoff series, the first thing to do, keeping in
mind that the new series is supposed to be "different" than the other, is
to have a whole new set of producers, effects people, writers, etc.  to
really make the show different, instead of more of the same drek again.
give it a look and feel all it's own.  c'mon guys, more splashy SFX do not
a show make.  ask cattlecar gaspactica.  babylon 5 please save us, you're
our only hope!  (let's not even talk about space rangers.)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: DCLATFEL@UCRAC1.UCR.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: RE: SF-LOVERS Digest   V18 #28
Date: 13 Jan 93 01:33:20 GMT

I've been perusing the dialogue on the use of non-linear time, and I have to
throw my two-bits in.  It has been said that:
 
The other possibility relies on what most of modern physics has to say
about time.  In this case, non-linear time covers everything from the birth
to the end of the universe ALL AT ONCE.  (There was no "time" before the
big bang, so don't try that one).  In this case, interaction, information,
cause-effect are all completely ruled out.
 
Hawking (1988) discusses what you're speaking of in his discussion of
light/event cones.  What I'm afraid you've missed, though, is the central
point of his thesis... That on the other side of the Big-Bang lies another
universe, where we can't begin to conjecture about the physical laws in that
realm because it is indeed separated from us (as you eruditely pointed out)
by the Big Bang singularity.  Now, if we can accept this other universe where
our physical laws quite conceivably don't exist in part or total, why is this
alternate universe within the context of the Star Trek series so hard to digest?
Furthermore, statements such as "I don't mind when they break the rules
that they need to to make the show interesting" are laughable.  Not only are
your lamentations unnecessary (the genre is science *FICTION*, after all) but
statements like that clearly demonstrate that you do not even hold "internal
consistency" (isn't that what you called it?) within your own point of view.
This serves only to make you look like little more than a demagogue.
 
Finally, in the words of the bard, "There is more on heaven and earth
Horatio..."
From: bz754@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Derek J. Wojciech)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: _Space Rangers_ (pilot's position)
Date: 8 Jan 1993 22:57:51 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, bscott@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ben Scott) says:

>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.
>
>I'm sure it can.  But why have the pilot lying down, not belted in or
>anything, and the rest of the crew sitting?  
>
>The way they did it, it just looked like they couldn't afford a chair for
>her... at least that was my thought when I saw it.  This was in between
>laughing at the absurd ways they had the other ship moving in relation to
>the pilot's viewpoint.
>
The only redeeming value I could see from the lying down position was her
viewing range.  She seemed to have a full 180degree spherical viewing range,
as her head seemed to jut into the dome shaped cockpit.  A big advantage
in such things as combat or pursuit, as you could track your enemy visually
to a greater degree.  But boy would that position get tiring (can we
say neck and muscle strain!)  The postion couldd help in such things as
a docking sequence.  But for normal casual coasting, use a regular chair.
BTW, for the record I enjoyed the show.  Not a sf intellectual colossus,
but the action coupled with a futuristic environment was fun.  The opening
sequence when they entered the stolen transport ship reminded me immediately
of the atmosphere so common in Alien(s).

                                        Derek

-- 
'Fire and Love, the two extremes |  wojciech@ossek.nrl.navy.mil /    ***.
that we live between, Fire and   |-----------------------------/    **   '
Love, there's more to life than  | Surfing or Snowboarding         ****
the eye can see.'  Guardian      |      ridin' the Wave........._-*********
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
Subject: Re: Grade Report: Space Rangers
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 11:06:28 GMT

In article <rawdon.726445215@cs.wisc.edu>, rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:
> There were a couple of other bright spots, too.  One was the special effects.
> While they suffered greatly from overuse of stock footage, what footage there
> was was quite impressive.  One might argue that the spaceships behaved too
> much like planes in an atmosphere, but I think that's a necessary evil in
> order to make the space shots interesting.  And I think they were MUCH better
> than the stiff collection of half-computerized hunks of metal we're stuck with
> on Star Trek: The Next Generation.  

I might argue, all right.

I'm really getting sick of spaceships making big banked turns, as if they were
in Top Gun.  At least ST:TNG occasionally remembers that all a ship must do is
spin on its axis and accellerate in the other direction to go that way.
To 'make a left' you yaw, say 135 degrees to port, accellerate until the
previous 'forward' velocity is cancelled, and/or slowly spin back to starboard
'til you're pointing in the direction you want to go.  It'd end up looking
a lot more like driving a car on slick pavement :)


-- 
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_
From: roald@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: DS9 was very BAD
Date: 12 Jan 93 14:12:17 -0400
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.tv
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

slrosser@whale.st.usm.edu (Meredith) writes:
> To those of you who are trashing DS9 because of poor science...
> 
> THAT'S WHY THEY CALL THEM SCIENCE FICTION SHOWS AND NOT
> SCIENCE -FACT- SHOWS!!!  

Oh, PLEASE. Some of us just have STANDARDS for the quality of our fictional
science.  There is a huge difference between sf produced by someone who
actually understands our best current view of the universe, and who carefully
chooses how and where to violate it, and the average hackwork with random
buzzwords spewed at convenience.

Good fictional science and entertainment are perfectly compatible. Consider,
for example, David Brin and Lois McMaster Bujold.

> And aside of the fact that these shows are meant to entertain us
> and -NOT- to inform us, consider this:  IT'S TELEVISION.  As a 
> culture, we should have long ago outgrown the belief that everything
> on television has to be true.  Your outrage is out of date by half a
> century.

Truth, no.  Some of us, however, continue to hope for signs of intelligence.
Sadly, that does not seem to be prerequisite for 'successful' TV.


  colin
  <sig left in rochester>
From: dfk0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (David F. Keppel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: The SciFi Channel stinks !! (was: Re: Does SciFi Channel cut
Date: 8 Jan 93 03:47:08 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1993Jan6.183438.14737@medtron.medtronic.com>, tp0001@medtronic.COM (
Terry Pinotti) writes:
>: >The more I hear about the SciFi channel, the more I don't give
>:  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>: >a damn that my local cable company doesn't carry it.
>:  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>I get the Sci-Fi channel and I read all the comments about how bad the
>programs are. Well, I want to hear some comments about what they
>should have on. If you count all the really good Sci-Fi, for whatever
>reason, you will see that there is not enough out their to fill a
>weekend's programming. And besides, what one person thinks is rotten
>may be another persons favorite show. That is the best aspect of SF.
>some people look for thoughtful social commentary and some want
>shootem ups.
>
>I have found very bad programs that have had a very good message and I
>have found great programs that said nothing. Who cares. It is still
>better than twin peaks or Dynasty. It is all relative.
>
>--
 I agree with Terry. If you think about it, there was never alot of sci/fi
 tv material to begin with.  Actually, the sf channel slightly breaks the
 rules by showing horror based shows like Dark Shadows, The Night Stalker,
 and Night Gallery. There is nothing wrong with this doing this, but
 where are all the good shows that we used to see years ago?
 Like The original Twilight Zone, or The Outer Limits, or the original
 Star Trek.  They are probably licensed to certain syndicated channels
 and are usually restricted in certain markets.

 Therefore its possible that the sci/fi channel might not successfully gain
 access to those shows which appeal to certain people. In addition, there
 is the possibility the channel might bomb due to lack of new subject material
 and rising operating costs.






 
-- 
    ###########################################################################
   ###        David F. Keppel -  The Computing Center -  Ext. 84019        ###
  ###        179  E.W. Fairchild/Martingdale Library Bldg. 8B             ###
 ###########################################################################
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: bammerla@cs.ruu.nl (Boris Ammerlaan)
Subject: Re: WANTED: V
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 10:45:03 GMT
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science

In <1993Jan11.202017.15388@crd.ge.com> howie@sunny.dab.ge.com (J. Bruce Howie) writes:

>I have a copy of both the first and second mini series but do not have any
>copies of the short lived series.

What? I only have a mini-series with five 1.5 hour episodes and a 18 episode
series with one pilot and seventeen 45 minute episodes. (Except for the
beginning of one episode.) You mean there's another series? Is it that series
called "V - The Final Battle"? I thought that that was a hack-and-slack job of
the miniseries. Can someone please post me on this?

Boris Ammerlaan

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: mueller@b30news.b30.ingr.com ( Phil Mueller )
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 22:36:24 GMT

In article <1irok3INN7rt@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bh419@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ted B Samsel) writes:
>
>Anybody else out there old enough to remember:
>
>ROCKY JONES::SPACE RANGER!!!(with a long reverb)???
>-- 
>Ted....


I do.  




Of course, I've seen them on MST3K :-)  :-)

-- 
Phil Mueller    mueller@b30news.b30.ingr.com
"Oh I get it.  This .signature is even stupider than I thought."
Joel, Time of the Apes (??)
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.tv:6355 rec.arts.tv:24786
From: sdr57@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Space Rangers !!Spoilers (I guess)!!
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 21:26:21 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.133729.1@skcla.monsanto.com> jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.150046.1445@cas.org>, sdr57@cas.org () writes:
>>>     ...  I was willing to overlook this until the guy was boxing
>>>     up the droid with a hammer and nails.  Don't you think that there
>>>     would be a more efficient method of fastening wood, at least use
>>>     a nail gun.
>>>
>> Similarly, nails work well - they've been around for thousands of
>> years. And if you're at the end of a long supply line, with budget
>> cutbacks all around, cartridges for your weapons may well have a
>> higher priority than cartridges for a nail gun. (I doubt the producers
>> thought about these points, however - I suspect they just liked the
>> scene of the Col. closing up the "coffin".)
>
>Umm... you seem to have overlooked a significant point -- where'd the wood
>come from?  It seems to me for shipping things, you
>       a) Don't bother with gravity in the hold, as it just causes things
>          to crush each other
>       b) Don't bother with packing materials, as they weigh a lot!
>
>So really, the android should have gotten the Laura Palmer treatment: wrap it
>in plastic.  The fact that it hadn't been deactivated seems unusually cruel on
>the android.
>
I think we are running this into the ground, since I think that the real
reason it was done that way was to give a closing scene, but...

Wood as a packaging material makes sense if you are on
a planet with trees and at the end of a long supply line -
you don't need a plastics factory. It also makes sense
to put the android in a crate if it isn't deactivated,
since this will serve to confine it to some dgree.

(I don't know why they didn't turn it off, either - I
agree it seems cruel if the android is self-aware -
maybe, since it was a police android, there was no off
switch to prevent bad guys from turning it off?)

Disclaimer:
I seriously doubt the producers of this show, who seem to
believe that UV light can accumulate in a room, gave as
much thought to this as the above justification would
imply.
******************************************************************************
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
Subject: Re: Highlander - Episode: "Innocent Man"
From: obie@hirama.hiram.edu
Date: 5 Jan 93 02:57:00 -0500
Organization: Hiram College
Nntp-Posting-User: obie

In article <1ial83INNasu@shelley.u.washington.edu>, labmas@stein.u.washington.
edu (Michael Andersson) writes:
> My local station recently broadcase the "Innocent Man" episode, and I was
> wondering...
> 
> Two immortals died near the cabin in the woods.  One (The Good Guy)
> inside, and one (The Bad Guy) outside.  When The Bad Guy was beheaded
> _outside_, the Quickening caused the cabin to explode.  BUT, when The Bad
> Guy beheaded The Good Guy _inside_, the cabin did *NOT* explode.  Why?
	Pure speculation- the amount of Quickening generated by a dead
immortal is proportional to how many other immortals have been beheaded
by that individual. Lucas seemed reluctant to kill others- he tried to
retire from The Game. Consequently, Lucas had little Quickening to give- no
big bang. Bad guys produce bigger bangs.

	However, who can explain how the cabin exploded when the Sheriff died 
and was intact again when Lucas' grave was shown!

	With such neat stories, why can't the directors get the scenes
consistent! 
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------
|Obie Slotterbeck     Hiram College      obie@hirama.hiram.edu |
|	There Can Be Only One! (Why couldn't it be Duncan???)  |
----------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.tv:6388 rec.arts.tv:24870
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Highlander Questions
Date: 6 Jan 93 01:57:06 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1993Jan4.121843.1@hirama.hiram.edu> obie@hirama.hiram.edu writes:
>Some comments:
>In article <1993Jan3.174653.2834@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu>, 
>spice@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu writes in reponse to:
>>> <C09M7n.2zK@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, tara@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Lady Johanna 
>>>Constantine) 
>>> The explanation of the people who make Highlander:The Series is that
>>> it takes place after the 1st Highlander movie but before Highlander 2:
>>> The Quickening (aka the Sickening). This explanation, given in an interview
>>> in Starlog magazine by one of the producers of the Highlander TV series 
>>> a few months ago, has huge problems as you've outlined above.

I think the producer goofed.  After all, according to the latest version of
the opening credits, "now is the time of the Gathering".  This would support
the theory that the series takes place just before the first movie, as the
Gathering is just beginning.

>In response to Lady Johanna Constantine's question,"Does anyone else find 
>Richie totally annoying? 

>	As a result, I find Ritchie irritating, but interesting. But, when
>did he go to live with Duncan? I thought I had missed an episode where this
>was explained. But apparently, "Innocent Man" followed "The Gathering" and
>there's a big gap there. In the one, Connor tells Duncan to look after "The
>boy"; in the next one, Ritchie is settled in. I would love to see Duncan 
>explain to Ritchie what Ritchie saw in "The Gathering"!

According to the same Starlog interview, "Family Tree" was supposed to be
the second episode.  Anyone out there think it makes a better settling-in
story than "Innocent Man" did?
From: hearth@halo.Unify.Com (Don Hearth)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Night Stalker on Sci-Fi Channel
Date: 6 Jan 93 20:01:46 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Unify Corporation, Sacramento, CA, USA


  I have heard that the Sci-Fi channel is showing the Night Stalker
  television show starring Darren McGavin. Can somebody confirm this,
  and if so, when does it air.

							 Thanks,
							 Don Hearth

-- 
***************************************************************************
*  Donald S. Hearth        *   address: hearth@unify.com                  *
*  UNIFY Corporation       *                                              *
*  Sacramento, CA          *   Go 49ers, A's, and LA Kings!               *
From: bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu (Greg Bole)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Grade Report: Space Rangers
Date: 8 Jan 93 21:10:27 GMT
Organization: HHMI/Human Genetics, Univ of Pa.

In article <rawdon.726445215@cs.wisc.edu>, rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu 
(Michael Rawdon) writes:

> The one bright spot is the empathic alien, who seemed well-written, 
> well-acted, and he and Boon make a pretty good tag-team (or at least look 
> like they *could*).  I might stick around for a few episodes just to see if 
> they do anything with him.

Wow, everyone seems to like this alien guy...I thought he was the most
offensive of the whole bunch.  Just from looking at him, and then as soon
as he opened his mouth it seemed like the powers that me reached back into 
an early Western and grabbed themselves a "Heap big Injun Warrior".

And for all you people whining about how much you hate ST:TNG, he was a 
direct meld of Deanna Troi, Worf, and Geordi LaForge.

Lines like "Captain!  I feel hostility!" or "It was a pleasure to speak in
my own language.  I would love to exchange poetry with you."  seemed to come
directly from a "Worst Of Star Trek Dialogue" manual.

Greg Bole                            "We ride...to hell.  Or to glory.  
bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu         It depends on your point of view."
                                Errol Flynn in _They Died With Their Boots On_
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv