HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Date: 26 Aug 92 12:23:40 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)

In article <z_bn0lc@lynx.unm.edu>, lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) writes:
|>Montague_Kevin @Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev) writes:
|>
|>> Now, about that hangin onto the ladder in the face of explosive
|>> decompression as Mama tries to yank her off. . . 
|>
|>How fast a wind would it take to blow *you* loose from the kind of hold
|>Ripley had on the airlock ladder rungs?  Nothing short of something
|>capable of ripping her arm off would have done it, and you can only pour
|>air through a hole so fast.  I don't see the problem.
|>

   You are correct in saying you can only pour air through a hole so
fast, but if that hole is the border between a large pressurised area
and total vacuum, I would guess that that IS as fast as you possibly
could pour air through your hole!!!! I reckon her arm would be minced.
            
+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Gary Bradley        |   "You receive a love letter from me and |
| ORACLE Corp, UK     |                  you're f*cked forever!" |
| Edinburgh, SCOTLAND |        - Frank Booth ("Blue Velvet")     |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| "God damn the censor man"                                      |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
From: kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: PLEASE - No more Alien posts!
Date: 27 Aug 92 20:28:56 GMT
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University

gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green) writes:
>PLEASE - enough with the Alien movies - aren't you guys getting bored shitless
>with this topic yet!

sigh...another asshole who would rather spoil other people's fun then learn
how to use his own system.

Steve, rather then be a kiiljoy, why don't you learn about the "kill" function
of your newsreader?

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 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: welter@fwi.uva.nl (Richard Welter)
Subject: Re: Plot holes in Alien^3 (*S
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 10:09:19 GMT

Montague_Kevin@Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev) writes:

>In article <sjurk.25@dhhalden.no>, sjurk@dhhalden.no (SJUR KRISTIANSEN) writes:
>> 
>> In article <1992Sep2.093007.7744@comp.lancs.ac.uk> marc@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Marc Goldman) writes:
>> 
>> >I always assumed that the face huggers could use acid to get at thier
>> >victims. If you go back to the first film, the face hugger found little
>> >problem getting through John Hurts helmet.
>> 
>> >I thought it used it's acid for this.
>> 
>> >Marc
>> 
>> Yeah! Right!!! I didn't think of that! Hmmm, that's one of my gripes done 
>> with! Thanx!

>???  What? How is this gripe answered?

>I gave up on pointing stuff like this out. . .it's yet another inconsistency 
>that can't be explained away, so what's the point in hashing it out...this
>is the same question as, "How was Ripley able to hold a face-hugger off her,
>when they're able to exude an acid strong enough to eat through Kane's helmet?"

Probably it didn't want to burn off her hands since she might bleed to death
and she wouldn't be of much use to the facehugger then.

>Evidence would seem to point to the f'hugger(s) in 3 trying to break the glass
>to get at the sleeper(s), and getting injured on shards, bleeding acid, and
>causing a fire.  NOT.  They can sear their way through such glass, as shown
>in the first movie.

I don't think a f'hugger got hurt, it just leaked a bit of acid in the wrong
place which burned through the floor and caused a short circuit.

Richard

>Ah well.  
>Kevvy Kev
>"Hmmm...  do ya think they'd give us a bulk discount if we all went and 
> got a life at the same time?"
>   -Guinny

-- 
*                         X      Computer Science                   /        *
*    Richard J. Welter   |X|  University of Amsterdam           \  /         *
*                         X                                     CIAmiga      *
*      "Marshmallows! Ben, where are those hickory sticks?!"  - Jerry        *
From: exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 31 Aug 92 17:58:17 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems

In article <9224201.893@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes:
>Now you say the system has to be *doubly* redundant? Jeez Louise, are you hard
>to please! 8^)
>
No, singularly SAFE redundant. The first dropship, and a SECURE second
dropship.

>Of course the dropship landing on the APC was incredibly improbable. It's a
>plot device... What, you wanted the movie to end with them going up to SULACO,
>nuking the place, and telling Wesley why bioengineering is not to be trifled
>with?
>
No, how about a shorter time to self destruct, and the second *PILOTED*
dropship encountering and ion storm or something. (From Trek) Same result,
minus one big, unbelievable plot error.

>Nothing is indestructible when a fully armed dropship lands on it, BTW.
>
Exactly why there should be a backup. If the first had a malfunction, dropped
and shorted out its and APC's transmitter, they should expect to remain there
. Whups, I'm retiring into the colonial terraformer's.

>
>-- 
>-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
>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.
>-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Death is the Ultimate Victor............            
                                                                      -Tom

Note : I don't care that my location shows .se, I'm in Dallas !!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (Two days and a wake-up...)
Subject: Re: ALIEN question
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 11:20:40 GMT

In article <5803@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>, mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes...

} Whoever picked the name Sulaco for the ship in Aliens should be flogged
} and declared void of intelligence. That two ships sixty years apart (one
} a freighter, one a warship, one company-owned, one by the military)
} should have such closely-related names is simply beyond belief.

Are you so bent on proving that ALIENS is so bereft of any positive
qualities whatsoever that even the pickiest little point gets jumped on
so vehemently?

The "whoever" was James Cameron. He specifically picked it as a deliberate
homage to O'Bannon's homage to Conrad. You aren't supposed to "believe"
that two such different ships in different times have such closely-related
names. This type of thing is a meta-point between the movies -- something
for the audience to nudge nudge wink wink at.

Gee, in each movie, during the meal scene, one character picks at something
on his plate and says, "What is it?" and another responds "Cornbread, I
think."  Are we expected to believe that 60 years apart, two pairs of
people, one pair being freight handlers and the other being solidiers would
have the exact same conversation? 

That's how silly your comment looks.

-- 

	"She's my radiation baby.
	 She's my teenage fallout girl."

--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, "The Mill", Maynard, MA)

    boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com
From: smintz@sedona.intel.com (Stephen Mintz exp 11/92~)
Subject: Re: Memoirs of an Invisible Man
Originator: smintz@alamo
Organization: Intel Corporation
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 22:34:01 GMT


IR is an emmision, not a reflection...
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: The Stand (Stephen King books)
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:44:06 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)

In article <54RQ02QG1fC.01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
beh10@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Holsinger) writes:
>
>Don't worry.  I read the first half of _The_Stand_ TWICE.  Very enjoyable
>first half of a book.  Never bothered reading the second half.  I have
>NO IDEA how it ends, and don't really care.  (I like post-apocolyptic
>stories, but not King's stuff in general.  BTW, hated the movie Pet Semetary;
>I wonder if the book was any good??)
>

   It's a rotten book. Very very very very dull. It's really just a
character study - no real storyline. I think the film did an excellent
job in actually getting a watchable story out of such a plotless boring book.
P.S. I also think S. King is pretty crap in general, but Pet Semetary
was even lower than King's usual low standard. The only one of his books
I have really liked is The Shining. And me a die hard horror fan!

+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Gary Bradley        |   "You receive a love letter from me and |
| ORACLE Corp, UK     |                  you're f*cked forever!" |
| Edinburgh, SCOTLAND |        - Frank Booth ("Blue Velvet")     |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| "God damn the censor man"                                      |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
From: 9032754@ul.ie (S)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Naming Alien 4
Date: 27 Aug 92 14:42:21 GMT
Organization: University of Limerick, Ireland

In article <BtK728.Epy@wpi.WPI.EDU>, drwho@wpi.WPI.EDU (Eric Ant Von Laudermann) writes:
> As a math major, I particularly noticed that although the movie
> was called ALIEN^3, most people called it ALIEN 3.  Not just out of
> convenience, mind you: they simply didn't get it (although most
> newspapers and entertainment magazines did.)  In keeping with
> this, how about:
> 
> ALIEN!
> ("alien factorial")
> 
> or...
> ALIENTH
> (1/alien)

what about   dAlien/dX
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: nigel@socs.uts.edu.au (Nigel Pearson)
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Organization: Computing Sciences, Uni of Technology, Sydney.
Date:  2 Sep 92 04:04:14 GMT

In <5796@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:

>Not a reasonable principle.  Note that in Starship Troopers, there ARE
>crews on the ships.  As for reality: The people who fly the AV-8Bs are
>different from those who storm the beaches, who are different from
>those who crew the landing ships.  Which brings me to another point:
>Why is there no crew on the ship?

	Sorry to bring this up, but didn't the dropship go back to the Sulaco
as soon as it dropped off the Marines in their little AV? Which would have
accounted for about 10 minutes during which the Sulaco was uncrewed.

--
    Nigel Pearson, research dog's-body @ University of Technology, Sydney.
 
   AARNet: nigel@socs.uts.edu.au         Talk: (Sydney) 330 1799 or 330 1816
   Hardcopy: Nigel Pearson, SOCS, UTS, PO Box 123, BROADWAY, Australia, 2007
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:45:31 GMT

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

>From article <u906789.714878216@bruny>, by u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner):
>> OK, the destruction of the dropship AND the APC which contained the transmitter is highly unlikely...

>Why?  It seems this was quite easy, and against a low-tech opponent.
>OK, the fact that the dropship hit exactly the APC in all the city is
>of very low probability.  Another plot device.  But the APC did not
>appear all that indestructible.

Aw, c'mon. It's fair enough to argue the case when you think that the Marine's
procedures were deliberately left open to the possibility of stranding the
squad, and that included having no-one on the Sulaco. I think it has been well
established that in the event of the dropship crashing, the APC transmitter is
used to bring #2 down on remote, so that the squad can always retreat to
SULACO if anything goes wrong.

Now you say the system has to be *doubly* redundant? Jeez Louise, are you hard
to please! 8^)

Of course the dropship landing on the APC was incredibly improbable. It's a
plot device... What, you wanted the movie to end with them going up to SULACO,
nuking the place, and telling Wesley why bioengineering is not to be trifled
with?

Nothing is indestructible when a fully armed dropship lands on it, BTW.


-- 
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
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.
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: gdg019@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Ridley McIntyre)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? Nothing!
Organization: Ironpig Arcadia, Coventry, UK
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 10:21:52 GMT

In article <36923@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> jma@reef.cis.ufl.edu (John 'Vlad' Adams) writes:
>Did v129j6ed@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu really type:
>> 
>> What about the first film? The Alien there killed people, and with the
>> exception of the eggs in the ship, it did not try at all to use people
>> as cocoons.
>
>Warning, Will Robinson!  There be spilers ahead!
>
>Are you sure?
>
>Ah, I see you haven't seen the cut footage of Dallas being used as a
>cocoon, then...  I've been fortunate to see cut scenes of the first movie,
>and I have a botleg of the second with such scenes as Riply finding out
>her daughter died, Newt asking about where babies come from, Newt's
>parents and brother, the colony on the planet, the robot machine guns...

Ah, we don't care, because neither has Ripley. When Gorman asks her what all
that stuff on the walls of the alien nest is she replies: "I don't know",
which is consistent with the ending of the first film. The scene with Dallas
coccooned was cut for pacing, just like the scene with Burke coccooned was
cut for pacing. All this running around places escaping from aliens/trying
to rescue Newt would have been blown-out completely if she suddenly stopped
and talked to someone, so they cut it. 

Now, if you want to talk about stuff that wasn't in the movie, try the ADF
Novelisations. In Alien, Parker gets attacked in the airlock when their
second attempt to blow it out the airlock almost succeeds. And she finds
Dallas coccooned at the end. In Aliens, she tells us that she DOES know what
the resin is but she's never seen this arrangement before, to keep in line
with the previous novel.


-- 
        	 **Ridley McIntyre - Ronin Ironpig**			
		     gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk
		 -----------------------------------
     "It'll be a cold night tonight... If it's cold." - Iain Morales
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Date: 26 Aug 92 03:15:17 GMT
Organization: Sporadic and incomplete

Montague_Kevin @Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev) writes:

> Now, about that hangin onto the ladder in the face of explosive
> decompression as Mama tries to yank her off. . . 

How fast a wind would it take to blow *you* loose from the kind of hold
Ripley had on the airlock ladder rungs?  Nothing short of something
capable of ripping her arm off would have done it, and you can only pour
air through a hole so fast.  I don't see the problem.

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes)
Subject: Even MORE crap on the Alien trilogy
Organization: SURAnet, College Park, MD, USA, NA, Earth, Milky Way
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:23:16 GMT

In article <2744@nlsun1.oracle.nl> gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley) writes:
>   If you mean in "Aliens" then only Ripley says "They don't kill you"
>and "Right now they're being cocooned". I have already suggested that
>this is a "plot hole" in Aliens as there is NO WAY Ripley could know
>that they don't kill their victims. Based on what she has experienced,
>she would have thought that victims of the Aliens would be very very
>dead very very quickly. Think about it: the entire crew of the Nostromo
>(cut sequences DO NOT count), the entire colony population minus 2 the
>entire Marine team that go in and don't come out, minus 2. Why should
>Ripley think Alien victims are not killed? This is a plot hole in ALIENS.

Gee, she sees from the APC all these colonists plastered to the wall with
these rather suspicious (and probably familiar) holes in their chests.
Hmmm.  Isn't it possible for her to figure out on her own, "Oh my God,
they're using them as *hosts*!"?  She seems to be a reasonably intelligent
individual (certain surrogate-daughter-rescue-scenes notwithstanding 8-)
and she has some idea how the Aliens reproduce, and it does make sense,
so maybe...

Naaaah!  Must be the Aliens' trophy collection!  "Yes, and this one I
bagged over in that narrow corridor.  Sucker never saw me coming!"

>   I liked the gnawing in "Alien 3". The Alien came from a dog, not a
>human: it looked more canine than humanoid, it attacked more canine than
>humanoid - I have no problem with that. It even has a sense of smell
>like a dog (in first scene it encounters Ripley it is definately
>sniffing at her and then leaves her alone [smells the queen??]). Maybe
>it has more of a canine intelligence than a human one and hasn't figured
>anything else to do with its victims except eat them. I have no problem
>with that.

I thought it was an interesting twist myself.  I wonder if there are
other traits the Aliens might inherit from their hosts...

>   Incidently, isn't the mopping up needed cause the guy fell into a
>fan??                        

I think the original poster of that comment was referring to the scene the
director was hauled up into the ceiling and later there's this prisoner
mopping up the floor underneath it and looking rather nervously up at
the ceiling and trying rather hard not to stand underneath the hole in
the ceiling...BTW, I have a sick sense of humor too B^>.
-- 
Bill "Whassamatter?!  Can't you take a joke?!" Barnes   wbarnes@sura.net
Disclaimer:  The author apologizes for any thought-provoking material he may
	     have accidentally included and promises not to do it again.
Datclaimer:  My employers wouldn't WANT to share some of my opinions.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: Philip.Banks@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Philip Richard Banks)
Subject: Re: Aliens ^3: Should I Watch It?
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:56:07 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.141336.13746@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
>
>I've heard a lot about Aliens^3, from both sides.  I haven't seen it
>yet, but I _have_ read the novelization (and didn't like it very much,
>for many of the same reasons stated by John Carson in his posts).  Now,
>Aliens^3 is currently showing in the dollar theatres here in town (the
>second-run theatres which only charge $1 admission).         
>
>I want a consensus on whether or not I should watch it.  Is it worth $1,
>plus bus costs?  Or should I just wait for it to come out on video or TV?

   Wait for it to come out on TV. It is not worth paying anything to see it.
In my opinion of course.

Philip
-- 
 Philip R. Banks  pbanks@comp.vuw.ac.nz (An Arc owner with a mission)  @@@@@/|
    (Quite what mission I am not too sure yet. But I do have one!)     @@@@/#|
 "There may be an om in moment,but there's very few folk in focus!"    @@@/--|
	--'Hallowed be thy Name' by Emerson,Lake & Palmer.             @@/###|
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: sdt8s@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Steve Tilson)
Subject: Re: Startrek VI - the video
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:45:38 GMT

Speaking of the added footage in the STVI video, I have a
question:
I was perusing videos at the local mall the other day and
happened across the widescreen edition LD of the film. On the
back, it said "Over three minutes of restored footage." On the
back of the VHS version, it says "NEARLY TWO minutes." What
happens in the other minute+? Or is this incorrect (is
Paramount Home Video trying to pull the wool over our eyes)?

Steve
--
You are a true believer. Blessings of the state, blessings of the masses.
Thou art a subject of the divine, created in the image of man by the masses,
for the masses. Let us be thankful we have an occupation to fill. Work 
hard...increase production...prevent accidents...and be happy. (THX-1138)
From: flip@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Phillip Russell)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: The Stand (Stephen King books)
Date: 26 Aug 92 08:27:36 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <54RQ02QG1fC.01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> beh10@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Holsinger) writes:
>
>Don't worry.  I read the first half of _The_Stand_ TWICE.  Very enjoyable
>first half of a book.  Never bothered reading the second half.  I have
>NO IDEA how it ends, and don't really care.  (I like post-apocolyptic
>stories, but not King's stuff in general.  BTW, hated the movie Pet Semetary;
>I wonder if the book was any good??)
>

Yes the books was very good. You could call the movie a paraphrased outline
of the book. It was recognizable but not the real story.

Of course you can never translate King's writing style into film.

Every book is a little different than the other. Some could be called
Sci-Fi, others Mideval.

His books really shouldn't be labeled blood&guts , but that's what makes
them sell. Oh, well.

Flip

>Also, I heard that _The_Stand_ is being made into a movie or tv mini-series.
>I doubt it would be any good on tv, the juicy stuff woould have to be too
>watered down. But-- hopefully I'm wrong!
>
>
>
>--
>Barry Holsinger       | I ain't git'n et by no gators to make my wage!
>Sunnyvale, CA         | There are better ways to make a buck in dis
>beh10@DUTS.amdahl.com | nutty town!!  -Ralph Snart


-- 
    __@  __@        Phillip "Flip" Russell  | Purdue University
  _-\<, -\<,_       flip@sage.cc.purdue.edu | West Lafayette, IN
 (_)/---|/-(_)      "We don't have enough power captain!!!"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies