HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 04:44:46 GMT

gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green) writes:

>In article <9223300.27460@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes:

>>Sulaco was a military transport, operated by the Marine Corps. Getting an
>>android on board like that would be nowhere near as easy for the Company as
>>getting Ash on board Nostromo had been. In fact, the word "impossible" springs
>>to mind.

>It's my impression that the Marine Corps were more-or-less in the pocket
>of "the company" anyway. In which case the above scenario could be plausible.

It's possible, yes. But I see no evidence in the film that says that the Marines
were anything but totally independent of WY.

-- 
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
JJ Glamma                          | "Hey look... The Sarge and Dietrich ain't
aka James William Patrick Bennetts |  dead, man... their signs are real low, 
jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU         |  but they ain't dead!"
-----------------------------------+ "Then we go back in and get them!"
When in doubt, use brute force.	   | "F*ck that!"
		-- Ken Thompson	   |	-- PFCs Hudson & Vasquez, on loyalty.
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
From: jsd@daimi.aau.dk (Jacob Steen Due)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Vasquez in Terminator2
Date: 13 Aug 92 12:46:37 GMT
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark

moscatel@granite.ma30.bull.com (Joseph Moscatelli) writes:

>In article <1992Aug11.110944.7378@sun.pcl.ac.uk> chrisc@sun.pcl.ac.uk (Chris Chamberlain) writes:
>>I noticed the actress who plays John Connors foster mother is none other than
>>one Jenette Goldstien (sp?), whom we all know and love as Vasquez in Aliens.
>>Even rewinding the film and watching the bits with her in again I couldn't
>>really believe it. She looks so different, where've the muscles gone? Has she
>>been in anything else? 
>        
>Predator II

Are you absolutly certain of this ?? I don't remember Jeanette Goldstein
in Predator II. The female cop was played by Maria Concita Alonso (sp).

/Jacob
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: teexijd@ioe.ac.uk (IAN DAVENPORT)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Star Trek VI - What anachronisms!
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:00:21 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Institute of Education, University of London

In <1992Aug18.230202.23378@sequent.com> davest@sequent.com (David C. Stewart) writes:



>	After watching "Star Trek VI - The Undiscovered Country" a couple
>of times, it strikes me that this film has one of the most anachronistic
>looks of any of the Star Trek works (the old, the new, the movies).

>	* Even the inclusion of the big chronometers all over the bridge
>	  have a somewhat archaic feel to them.

Yeah, there was something very odd about the vast bank of VDUs behind Kirk's
chair - I mean in 300 years we're still gonna have our computer output on
CRTs?  Given that the film-makers needed dome form of output there, did they
have to make it that obvious?

>David C. Stewart                       	uunet!sequent!davest
>Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.		davest@sequent.com

Ian J Davenport   MULLARD SPACE SCIENCE LABORATORY   ijd@uk.ac.ucl.mssl

          "I know engineers, they love to change things."
From: t9014201@phillip.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Naming Alien 4ex
Date: 17 Aug 92 00:02:06 GMT
Organization: RMIT (Bundoora Campus)

In article <1992Aug16.004043.17790@sura.net>, vargish@sura.net (Nick Vargish) writes:
> There's only one real possibility:
> 
> 		ALIENS 4
>               Now they fly!
> 
> Nick "Sure it's obscure. Sue me." Vargish

A Piranha II (god, how the hell do you spell Piranha?) reference perhaps?
--
* Clouds...  Love...  Stars... Colours... *
                                     Greg McPherson * T9014201@phillip.edu.au
From: mcclaine@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Casey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Date: 21 Aug 92 19:15:15 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <BtAyo5.Dp0@acsu.buffalo.edu> v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
>>1) The Sulaco was a military transport. I can (just) by Weyland-Yutani tapping
>>into its telemetry in the third film, but I certainly don't buy them being
>>able to issue orders to the military hardware.
>
>     Can I say something?
>     Who ever said that The Colonial Marines wasn't a DIVISION of The Company?
>     Not a separate entity, but a connected arm.  Not a national, but a 
>     corporate, defense mechanism.  
>
>     -Scott Gorcey

	The only source that I know of that discusses the political
	layout of the Alien universe is the Aliens Role Playing Game
	which is licensed by Twentieth Century Fox.  It claims that
	the Colonial Marines are a separate entity from any of the 
	Corporations and are actually used to police the corporations
	and protect humanity.  However, the corporations do have
	armies of their own, unfortunately, generally better equipped
	than the Marines.
	Anyway, if the marine mission to LV426 WAS tainted by Weyland-Yutani
	or some other faction, then all I can say is that almost anything
	can be bought.  The bio-weapons division of Weyland could use the
	aliens to attack colonies owned by other companies so that they
	themselves can gain more power and wipe the other corporations out.


	_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/   	Troi:  "Worf, what exactly is that band
	_/     _/  _/       _/     _/   that you wear on your uniform?"
	_/     _/  _/       _/              
	_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/   _/            
	_/   _/    _/       _/          Worf:  "It's a Klingon flea collar." 
	_/    _/   _/       _/     _/      
	_/     _/  _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/      
	Robert E. Casey  (mcclaine@milton.u.washington.edu)
From: chrisc@sun.pcl.ac.uk (Chris Chamberlain)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Vasquez in Terminator2
Date: 12 Aug 92 15:54:31 GMT
Organization: Polytechnic of Central London

In article <1992Aug12.014631.17260@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bz978@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Charles E Gibbs) writes:
>
>I might be wrong, but I though Vazquez's real name is Jennifer Goldstein,
>not Jenette, which is why you had trouble recognizing her as Vazquez.
>
>Charles Gibbs
>gibbsc@ac.grin.edu

No, it's definitely Jenette

Chris.
From: dave@gergo.tamu.edu (Dave Martin)
Subject: Re: 2001, 2010 and David Bowman
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M University
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 16:37:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.111552.570@engage.pko.dec.com>, boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The Man from Another Place) writes...
In article <1992Aug10.171910.3773@tolten.puc.cl>, flalbert@lascar.puc.cl (L.Alberti IIC.FUN) writes...
} In 2010 credits, Bowman is performed by Keir Bullea.
.
Dullea, actually.
.
} Well... here is my question: does anyone know who performed Bowman
} in 2001????
.
Keir Dullea played Bowman in both films. The mind-boggling thing is that
he *does* look exactly like he did before even after 16 years had passed.
Dullea must come from the same non-aging genetic stock that David
McCallum comes from.

At the time of 2010's release, I read or saw something regarding the making
of 2010. It was mentioned that, for 2001, Kubrick felt that Bowman should
be much older than Keir was at the time, so they "aged" him in 2001. Add
that to Keir's healthy lifestyle and a little makeup (very little) and you've
got a David Bowman who has not aged a day in 16 years. Guess this is a case
of lucky foresight on Kubrick's part. 

 -                                                                     -
 - Dave Martin - Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M - 
 - DAVE@GERGA[GERGO,GERGI].TAMU.EDU - BROOKS@TAMVXOCN.BITNET - AOL:DBM -
 -                                                                     -
From: teexijd@ioe.ac.uk (IAN DAVENPORT)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Movie indentification request
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:59:30 GMT
Organization: Institute of Education, University of London

In <1992Aug18.193625.3226@cunews.carleton.ca> wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca (Tom Hamill) writes:

>In article serge@dgbt.doc.ca (Serge Ah Hee) writes:
>>In article jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:
>>>> In article Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
>>>> ...
>>>>> We are trying to identify a movie remembered from about 1980.
>>>>> Here is the plot:  A highly lethal virus escapes from an
>>>>> experimental lab in Canada.  The first victim is a bird.  Some
>>>>> children on a snowy playground bury the bird and in touching it,
>>>>> start the spread of the disease.  A woman flees to the USA, not
>>>>> realizing she is safe from the disease, but she is a carrier and
>>>>> leaves death in her wake.  One stop she makes is at a fast-food
>>>>> place that has just received an order for many sandwiches to be
>>>>> delivered.  An employee touches the money she gives him and goes
>>>>> on making sandwiches...
>>>>> 
>>>I believe it was "Rabid".  It starred Marilyn Chambers as the
>>>carrier.   
>>
>>I don't think it had anything to do with rabids. Some scientists design a 
>>bacterie (sp?) that will help plant growth. But the bacterie has a side 
>>effect, it attacks the nervous system...Can't remember the title of the movie.
>>
>>Serge 
>>
>I checked my closest video store for "Rabid", and from the description
>on the case, there is a close match to the requester's description.
>Until someone who has actually seen this movie verifies it, my vote is
>for "Rabid" as the movie being looked for.

Rabid was on in the UK recently, and from what I remember, the woman
who was infected became so because of an odd skin graft after an
accident involving her, a motorbike and a van. I don't remember anything
about a bird, or the kids burying it. This was Rabid directed by David
Cronenberg.


>---tom

>l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l
>l      CRUSH---CompassionRespectUnderstandingSelfHonesty---CRUSH      l
>l         How could you have ever lived your life without it?         l
>l               Join Now, Apply Within.  Spread the word.             l
>l____________________________      ---me, trying to save the world,   l
>l wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca l                      from itself.       l
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ian J Davenport   MULLARD SPACE SCIENCE LABORATORY   ijd@uk.ac.ucl.mssl
                 
                "He's coming right at us!"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Subject: Re: Naming Alien 4
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 17:54:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

I still think "Alienbusters" would be the best bet, followed by "Hoo Boy,
Look at All Those Aliens!" Perhaps an entire movie could be done from 
the Point-of-View shots that Aliens^3 were famous for; then the movie could
be called "Humans." 
-- 
John Switzer               | "Want world peace?
                           | Fight for world freedom."
74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | 
jrs@netcom.com             |
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Date: 16 Aug 92 11:47:50 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <Bt1nqH.EBw@acsu.buffalo.edu> v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
>     of ALIENS.  But you can't.  Because they are not chapters in a 
>     serial, but separate movies - to be taken separately; to be taken
>     as non-linear sequels, even.  

	Sorry, dude, that's one of the more ridiculous things you've said.
So far you were arguing in a fairly reasonable manner; I just don't agree.

	But this is silly. See below.

>     I think that's symptomatic of why so many people failed to
>     appreciate ALIEN^3: too many of you wanted, needed, expected
>     another two and a half hours to attach onto the end of ALIENS,
>     and when you didn't get it, you threw tantrums.

	Look. If you have a movie which uses a prior background, uses the
same actors, same name, and same designs, you SHOULD expect that this
sequel has SOMETHING to do with the previous movies. That was what made
ALIENS *WORK*! It took the original movie and took it off in another direction
while NOT ignoring what had previously happened. Ripley was still Ripley,
the Alien ship was still hanging out on the planet, continuity was 
preserved, etc.

	When I went to see Empire Strikes Back, I expected to see something
connected with Star Wars. When I went to see Star Trek x, I expected to see
a movie that used the Star Trek background in the proper manner. When
I went to see Rocky II, I did not expect to see Rocky change professions
without explanation, or have been the heavyweight title holder for
years on end. 

	A sequel is EXPECTED to follow up on what the prior movies did.
That is its JOB in part. ALIEN^3 fell down on the job there. If they
wanted an entirely independent movie, they could have called it "killer
from space" and used a different cast. Fine. But they didn't. They made
it an "ALIEN" film and as such were obligated to pay attention to the
prior films. Even if you LOATHED ALIENS, they were duty bound to do 
one of three things:

	1) Follow up on ALIENS. This is what they made it APPEAR they were
doing, and did very, very badly.

	2) Ignore ALIENS (rather as Star Trek 2 ignored ST I), and begin
after ALIEN, if they wanted to use Ripley.

	3) Ignore ALIEN and have an entirely separate cast meet the little
bastards.

	Alien^3, done as the last one, would have been a tolerable movie.
Not a GREAT movie, but tolerable.


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
From: ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Aaron Wigley [Wigs])
Subject: Script Query: _The_Princess_Bride_
Organization: Monash University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 03:28:05 GMT

I'm looking for the correct dialogue spoken between Westley and Inigo
during the swordfight in the ruins. What I have sofar is:

Inigo: 		You seem a decent fellow. I hate to kill you.
Dread Pirate Roberts: 	
		You seem a decent fellow. I hate to die.
Inigo: 		Begin. 
		You are using ______'s defense against me, eh?
Dread Pirate Roberts: 	
		I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.
Inigo: 		Naturally, you must expect me to attack with ____________.
Dread Pirate Roberts: 
		Naturally, but I find that _________ cancels _____.
Inigo: 		Unless the enemy hasn't studied ______, which I have! 
		You are wonderful!
Dread Pirate Roberts: 	
		Thank you. I've worked hard to become so.

I don't suppose someone could fill in the blanks?

The Wigs of Oz,
Aaron Wigley		ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au
From: corwin@ensta.ensta.fr (Gilles Gravier)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Memoirs of an Invisible Man
Date: 21 Aug 92 08:29:35 GMT
Organization: Ensta, Paris, France
NNTP-Posting-Host: ensta.ensta.fr


	Anyone notice the GREAT special effects in this movie? Just so
bluffing! They thought just about everything... Even up to searching for
him using 2 coupled cameras, one Infra Red, on Visual, to spot the guy who
appears on one, but not the other... But...

	- If he is Invisible, meaning light just flows through him... Why
doesn't Infra Red (just adjacent to plain Red on the light spectrum) also
flow through him?

	Ok, this one was just for fun, say, his molecular structure has just
been altered SO much as not to effect I.R. spectrum.

	- Worse, if he is still material enough that when sitting on a chair,
the back of the chair goes backwards... But, you DON'T see the cushion of the
chair being deflated... To bad, as during the same time, you see those great
effects with the gum!

	Anyway, I really enjoyed the film. Interesting to come up, after som
many episodes of Envisible Man series on TV, with a new idea!

	Gilles.


-- 
 This message has been brought to you by Gilles GRAVIER - corwin@ensta.fr
                       ***** Amber Forever! *****
    I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am
       sure, you realize,  that what you heard is not what I meant.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 23:03:03 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <BtAyo5.Dp0@acsu.buffalo.edu> v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
>>1) The Sulaco was a military transport. I can (just) by Weyland-Yutani tapping
>>into its telemetry in the third film, but I certainly don't buy them being
>>able to issue orders to the military hardware.
>
>     Can I say something?
>     Who ever said that The Colonial Marines wasn't a DIVISION of The Company?
>     Not a separate entity, but a connected arm.  Not a national, but a 
>     corporate, defense mechanism.  
>
>     -Scott Gorcey

Numerous badges & stuff identfy them as the USCMC: United States
Colonial Marine Corps. I think this is also identified in the
movie, but I'm not 100% positive (need to watch the damn thing
AGAIN... sigh. :).

Also... the conversation w/ Burke, Ripley and Hicks in the APC:
(Roughly, from memory...)

Ripley: I say we take off an nuke the site from orbit. Its the
only way to be sure.

Burke: Whoah, whoah, whoah! This is an important species we're
dealing with. I don't think you, or I, or anyone has the right to
arbitrarily exterminate them.

Vasquez: Wrong.

Hudson: I don't know where you've been, but we just got our asses
kicked, pal!

Ripley: This mission is under military juridiction, and I believe
Corporal Hicks is next in chain of command, isn't that right?

Burke: This site has a substatial dollar value attached. He can't
make that kind of decision, he's just a grunt! No offence...

Hicks: None taken. (into comlink) Ferro, do you copy?

Ferro (over link): Roger.

Hicks: Prepare for immediate evac. (to Ripley) I say we take of..
nuke the site from orbit... only way to be sure.

...

Okay, not perfect, but you remember the scene. :)

Joshua
   _  _      "Thats a good idea!"  "I have those every once in a while."
 -(_)(_)-      "Why do you listen to me when I'm wrong?!?"
 \      /          - Dr. Goldfoot and the Bikini Machine
  |  . |      
  -____-      jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca 
 /  \/  \     Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: liebman@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Ariel Liebman)
Subject: Re: Vasquez in Terminator2
Organization: Physics Dept. The University of Queensland
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 08:26:20 GMT

-- 
I also think she was the MP that got blown away at the begining of 'The Presidio'
with Sean Connory and Mark Harmon.

Ariel Liebman
*********************************************************
	Physics Dept.
	Uni. of Queensland.
	Brisbane
	Australia
	liebman@newton.physics.uq.oz.au
*********************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: kudra@hubcap.clemson.edu (sallie j kudra)
Subject: Re: 2001, 2010 and David Bowman
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:50:48 GMT

flalbert@lascar.puc.cl (L.Alberti IIC.FUN) writes:

>I've got a question and I think this is the most proper place to ask it
>(tell me if I'm wrong):

>As you know, 2001 movie was made in 1968 (more or less) and there is one
>character called "David Bowman". In 1986 was made 2010; in this movie
>appears again David Bowman ... and he looks identical to 2001's Bowman:
>not just look-alike, but IDENTICAL.

>In 2010 credits, Bowman is performed by Keir Bullea.
>In 2001 credits, there is no reference to anyone (just a "A Stanley
>Kubrick Release" message). Well... here is my question: does anyone know
>who performed Bowman in 2001????

>Thanks in advance. MIGUEL FARAH

It was Keir Dullea as well.


*****************************************************************************
 You may be right, I may be crazy                 | Sallie Kudra
 But it just may be a lunatic you're lookin' for  | kudra@hubcap.clemson.edu
                         Billy Joel               | kudra@clemson.clemson.edu
*****************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: ALIEN 3 (eggs on the _Sulaco_)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:42:47 GMT

mcclaine@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Casey) writes:

>	gear came up.  There were just about as many loose ends in Aliens
>	as there were in Alien.

Agreed... but both films pale before the veritable feast of loose ends and
sloppy writing that is Alien 3.

>	I can easily explain how the facehugger got into the hypersleep
>	chamber.  It was shown during the brief flashes at the beginning 

That's not the problem... the problem is how did the *egg* get in there? While
we're at it, why didn't Ripley search for huggers and eggs before entering
hypersleep? Just how stupid do 20th Century Fox think we are?

<Sigh>, I think I'll go and watch the infinitely superior Highlander 2.


-- 
  ___  __  __  __  ___ 
  \  \ \/ /  \ \/ /  /  WEYLAND-YUTANI BIOWEAPONS DIVISION
   \  \  /    \  /  /   "Bringing The Universe Back Home."
    \  \/  /\  \/  /    ------------------------------------
     \    /  \    /     JJ Glamma aka James William Bennetts
      \  / /\ \  /      jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU
       ~~  ~~  ~~   
 Building Better Worlds
From: walrus@bessel.umd.edu (Grig Larson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Naming Alien 4
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:58:11 GMT
Organization: Punkadyne Industries(tm)

In article <20681@optima.cs.arizona.edu> jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (J. Taggart Gorman) writes:
>
>In article <edd151s.713586079@nella1.cc.monash.edu.au> edd151s@nella1.cc.monash.edu.au (Mr I.P. Rayner) writes:
>>Or, we could always go for Aliens' (on the homeworld), A Fistfull
>>of Aliens (set in the old west), 7 Hosts for 7 Aliens (a few
>>sequels down the line...)... sigh, I remember the speculation for
>>III - Three Aliens and a Little Lady, The Three Aliens,
>>Alienses... :)
>
>  (Sorry, I deleted the last posts in this thread, but I wanted this
>message.)
>
>  After a Fitsfull of Aliens, don't forget :
>
>  For a Few Aliens More
>  The Good, the Bad, and the Alien
>  High Plains Alien
>  Two Aliens for Sister Sarah  (Or should that be Sister Newt/Ripley?)
>
>  Or how about :
>
>  Aliens IV : The Search for Newt
>  Alien Without a Cause


Dances with Aliens
Aliens in the Mist
Karate Alien
Driving Miss Alien
 
:)


                     +---------------------------+
                     |    This .sig has been     |
                     |    temporarily removed    |
                     |        for study.         |
                     +---------------------------+
(c)1992 Punkadyne Research Labratory and Archives at walrus@bessel.umd.edu
From: sblh@s17.msi.umn.edu (Susan Levy Haskell)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: THE CLOWN IN "IT"
Date: 21 Aug 92 20:37:33 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota

Sarek@world.std.com (Garrett Fitzgerald) writes:

>In article <1992Aug18.140358.17346@ncsu.edu> jhpace1@eos.ncsu.edu writes:
>>Tim Curry also played the main character of the butler in "Clue" (with Coleen
>>Camp as the maid!!!)

>I'd really like to see him as the butler in the novel
>_The_Remains_of_the_Day, by Ishiguro. Does anyone else have an opinion
>on that?

Oooooh!  I love it!  I suspect that it's not only too difficult to do well,
but doesn't have the high-concept to satisfy the movers & shakers, so it's
a forlorn hope, but I'm with you!
-- 
Susan B. Levy Haskell             |||       sblh@msi.umn.edu
Macintosh & Network Administrator |||     voice: (612) 624-8862
Minnesota Supercomputer Institute |||      fax: (612) 624-8861
University of Minnesota           |||        Baby on board!