HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: smintz@sedona.intel.com (Stephen Mintz exp 11/92~)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Terminator II *flaw*
Date: 12 Nov 92 17:37:21 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation
NNTP-Posting-Host: alamo.intel.com
Originator: smintz@alamo


I just saw Terminator again (the first movie) the Psychologist brought up the
question about the terminator comming though, in the intearigation in the police
station, and the guy said that it was a machine incased in living tissue....
Stephen
From: william@cithara.uucp (William Ross)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: computers in films
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 22:42:12 EST
Organization: Local Testbed for network mail, we trust!

steven@syacus.acus.oz.au (Steven Malikoff) writes:

> How about:
> The cubic-mile Krell computer in "Forbidden Planet"?
> "Marvin", the ship's computer and "Deep Thought" in "The hitch-hikers Guide..
> "Joshua" and an old IMSAI 8080(!) in "War Games"?
> The shootout in the computer room in "Die Hard"?
> "HAL 9000" and "SAL 9000" in 2001 and 2010?
> "Orac" and ? in "Blake's Seven"?
> Dexter Riley (Kurt Russell!) in "The Computer that wore Tennis Shoes"?
> "Edgar" in "Electric Dreams"?
> "Colussus" in "The Forbin Project"?
> "MCP" in "Tron"?

...and M5 Star Trek....Nomad...well he was a Robot
Probe...Landrew...StarTrek...VGER In A Star Trek Film....One of the
*lost* Voyager Probes....Here's one from Vonnegut...EPICAC (sp...my Kurt
Kollection is in the other room...) Atavcron...In The Library...Star
Trek....Remember Mr. Atos?....But What Was the name of the machine in
*This Island Earth?*

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                         william@cithara.login.qc.ca
                                         comback.login.qc.ca!cithara!william
                                         spongebo%cithara@comback.login.qc.ca
From: johnh@prism.CS.ORST.EDU (John Holeman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Computers in Films/TV
Date: 6 Nov 92 23:05:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: flop.1detn6INNn2b
Distribution: world
Organization: Oregon State University, Computer Science Dept.
NNTP-Posting-Host: prism.cs.orst.edu

In article <1dc5glINN7v1@chnews.intel.com> smintz@sedona.intel.com (Stephen Mintz exp 11/92~) writes:
>
>Holly from Red Dwarf...
>Stephen

I should have thought of that!!!
From: whutchis@sol.tmc.edu (wade hutchison)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Alphaville! {was computers in movies}
Date: 13 Nov 1992 14:47:06 GMT
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.cs.bucknell.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Computers in Films/TV
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA
Keywords: 

In article <1951@lysator.liu.se> marvil@lysator.liu.se (Martin Vilcans) writes:
>gumby@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (David Brian Gumminger) writes:
>
>  [ stuff deleted about computer names in movies]
>
>Don't you watch foreign movies? Why haven't anyone mentioned ALPHA 60, in
>the french movie Alphaville? That one has the best computer voice I've heard,
>I think it's made by someone who has been treated for throat cancer and have
>to talk directly out of his throat, without using the mouth.


Ah, Alphaville.  I saw this once at Bucknell's foreign film series and have been
looking for it on video ever since.  I believe the computer was called 69 
(soixant - neuf) and my understanding is that the voice of the computer was
the director (Jean Luc Godard, I believe, but I could be wrong).

If anyone has any info on a video store in the US that sells this classic film,
(or any other Godard work) would you please let me know!



	-----wade
	whutchis@sol.cs.bucknell.edu
From: bxp1628@hertz.njit.edu (Brian Perler)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Q: Journey to Far Sid
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:16:26 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <RATINOX.92Nov5105402@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu writes:
>>>>>> "MS" == Morten Steinhauer <morten.steinhauer@thcave.no> writes:
>MP> 	Hey... wasn't "LV426" the ID of the stormtrooper that Luke
>  > 	stole his uniform from (in ANH)?
>
>MS>         I always thought (it's been a long time) that the line went:
>MS>         "THX-1138, why aren't you at your post", or something...
>
>][n the movie, it was "TK-427, why aren't you at your post." The
>novelization uses "THX-1138".

Yes, the novelization of Star Wars uses THX-1138.  The movie, however,
uses TK-421.  Minor difference.

-- 
Brian Perler			bxp1628@hertz.njit.edu
"I wanna decide who lives and who dies"
	-Crow T. Robot, "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians," MST3K
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Godzooky Is A Toon!!!
From: jajohnston@ualr.edu
Date: 10 Nov 92 12:34:33 GMT
Organization: University of Arkansas at Little Rock

Sea Wasp,
  
  When I read the comments about Godzooky, I was forced to remember the animated
Godzilla cartoons with the miniture flying dinosaur in it who blew out smoke
rings.  This show had Godzilla helping a group of humans, with whom Godzooky
lived, on a Hydrafoil.  Does this ring any bells?  I hope I have helped you
with your question, and am looking forward to renting Godzilla (any) in the
near future.

jajohnston

******************************************************************************* 
*                                                                             *
*"By Jove, If it's good enough for that sailor man,                           *
* it's good enough for me!"                         jajohnston@ualr.edu       * 
*                                                                             *
*******************************************************************************
From: rdosser@UTKUX1.UTK.EDU (rdosser)
Subject: Re: I Liked Alien 3
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:48:54 GMT

In article <6098@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:

<stuff deleted>

>
>As for their training, they were a spaceship crew.  Ripley: navigator,
>Dallas: captain, Brett and Parker: engineers, Ash: medic and science
>officer.  (This has no effect on your argument, but why somebody would
>think they were miners is beyond me.  Workers on oilfields do not
>return home as tanker crew members.)
>-- 
>Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
>University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
>Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst

An EXTREMELY minor point here, but it looked to me like Lambert was the
astrogator and Ripley was more like the communications officer.
At any rate, with all those tons and tons of equipment, and so few crew,
it looked like everybody had to know how to do dozens of different
jobs.

Just posting out loud. No big woof.

rdosser@utkux.utk.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: rdosser@UTKUX1.UTK.EDU (rdosser)
Subject: Blade Runner Quote 
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:25:07 GMT

Help me out, Blade Runner fans.
When Deckard is questioning Zhora at the bar, she says something along
the line of "Would I be working here if I could afford a real snake?"
What, exactly, is that line?

email me at rdosser@utkux.utk.edu. Thanks a million

Ralph Dosser
University of Tennessee Computing Center, or something like it
From: smith@ctron.com (Lawrence C Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: computers in films
Date: 6 Nov 92 13:30:24 GMT
Reply-To: smith@ctron.com
Organization: Cabletron Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Nov5.130906.27397@ifi.uio.no>, knutt@ifi.uio.no (Knut Torgersen) writes:
>In article <Bx8DE8.CIx@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, jjh37997@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (James J. Herlburt) writes:
>>In article <Bx7GpD.61G@cmptrc.lonestar.org> brad@cmptrc.lonestar.org (Brad Barton) writes:
>>>The first one that comes to my mind is Joshua from "War Games".
>>The first one !?!?! How can you have forgotten Hal from 2001?
>>I'm sorry. I can't do that Dave.

>As far as i recall, the full name of the computer was Hal 2000. The computer
>from 2010 was called Sal something. (I think.)

How quickly they forget.  HAL _9000_, and SAL _9000_.  "2000" refers to
"Alex 2000", the supercomputer guardian of a world-destroying weapon that
was tackled on an episode of "The Bionic Woman".  The weapon turned out
to be a fake, to through fear of God into the leaders of the world, who
were convinced the weapon had been triggered and all humanity was going
to die.  Not a bad episode.

HAL 9000 was called "Athena" in several early drafts of 2001.  These are
documented in "Lost Worlds of 2001".

Joshua (WOPR)
HAL 9000
SAL 9000
Alex 2000

Are we sticking to just movies?  I guess so, so I won't mention Dora, Minerva,
and Athena from Time Enough for Love, or Gay Deciever, who was the only
engaging character in Number of the Beast.

Did the big sinister computer from "The Invisible Boy" have a name?

Of course, we can't forget Colossus and Guardian from "Colossus: The Forbin
Project".  Equally of course, we CAN forget that pathetic "supercomputer"
from Superman 3, starring Richard Pryor as the most unlikely hacker ever
born.  Heaven knows I'm _trying_ to forget that one...

Larry Smith (smith@ctron.com)  No, I don't speak for Cabletron.  Need you ask?
-
Liberty is not the freedom to do whatever we want,
it is the freedom to do whatever we are able.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jarnis@mits.mdata.fi (Jarno Kokko)
Subject: Re: The Abyss Special Edition LD?
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:21:52 GMT
Keywords: The Abyss, LD

In article <1992Nov9.232907.16167@sura.net> wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.095511.2346@hsr.no> geirj@hsr.no (Geir Johannessen) writes:
>>A friend of mine owns a LaserDisc player, and he's interested in buying the
>>special edition of THE ABYSS (99.99 UK pounds at Movie Boulevard in UK).
>
>Presuming the PAL version is the same as the NTSC version, I'll see if 
>I can help you here...
>
>>However, he'd like to know more about what the 'special edition' tag
>>implies in this case.
>
>Well, it means about 40 minutes of cut footage is reinserted into the
>movie ala the Aliens Special Edition (this includes the tidal wave
>sequence), making it just under 3 hours long, as well as supplemental
>information, like both Alien movies.
>
>Sound good to you?
>-- 
>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.

40 minutes????? huh... could you describe more what has been inserted.
I belive there's really very much new footage ...
From: iroderic@alfred.carleton.ca (Ian Roderick)
Subject: Re: Deckard as 6th Replicant doesn't hold water
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 05:00:58 GMT

In <720976152.25474@minster.york.ac.uk> sjbuckle@minster.york.ac.uk writes:

>Sorry, I've just started reading this group: could someone explain to me why
>this thread is called "Deckard as 6th Replicant..." ? Is it something to do
>with the bit that puzzles me in Bladerunner where the chief of police tells
>Deckard that 6 replicants jumped ship, but then only describes the fate/    
>whereabouts of 5 of them ?

Oh no! :-)

Ian

===========================================================================
The Top - few guys made it...
Between those operators the big time semiotics racket was pretty well
sewed up.  New talent had it tough breaking in.  BUT - from THE NORTH
- there was coming a man who would smash the order and shape an
all-new and all-mighty semiotics empire!  His name was [insert-name].
He had a dream!

  adapted from John Paizs <1985> _Crime_Wave_ without any permission
===========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jon@gsdix.demon.co.uk (Jon Mayers)
Distribution: world
Subject: Re: computers in films
X-Mailer: cppnews $Revision: 1.14 $
Organization: GSDix
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:11:18 +0000

In article <mwojcik-051192125743@college23.sas.upenn.edu> mwojcik@mail.sas.upenn.edu (Michael Wojcik) writes:

>                        Also, there was a Movie about an AI home system
>that went crazy and attacked the creators wife in an attempt to procreate
>(I think this was a Kirk Douglass movie) might be called something like
>"Demon Seed"

The movie was "Demon Seed" (with Julie Christie, methinks), and the AI
was called Proteus.
--
Jon Mayers              |  just 'J'-'O'-'N', no 'H'  |      I never met
jon@gsdix.demon.co.uk   |  voice: (+44) 61 905 1601  |   a bar of chocolate
jon@cix.compulink.co.uk	|  fax:   (+44) 61 905 2285  |	   I didn't like.
From: redrum@carson.u.washington.edu (Joe Stremick)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: T3?
Date: 12 Nov 92 04:12:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov12.041227.29455
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <880840m.46.721534938@ace.acadiau.ca> 880840m@ace.acadiau.ca (MICHAEL ALEXANDER MCKAY) writes:
>When T2 was released, there was a one-issue tie-in photo magazine full of 
>pix from the movie, interviews with the stars, and so on. One photo showed 
>Linda Hamilton in old-age makeup, looking peaceful, wearing a poncho. 
>However, no such scene appears in T2.
>
>Theory: It's from a scene in which Sarah Connor grows old happily in a nuke-
>free future. "How about that," she says, "We really are safe, children."
>*But*, including this scene would have precluded a T3 movie in which the 
>future is again imperiled. So it was cut; so T3 *is* planned.
>
>What do you think?

	It *is* from the final scene, which *was* cut; but not because
a third film is planned.  It was cut because James Cameron felt it
did not fit in with the mood of the rest of the film.  There are more
details in the book _T2: The Book of the Film_, which contains the
script.  (neat book, that)  In regard to this scene, Cameron says
"sometimes something works on paper which just doesn't work on film."

|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-Joe Stremick,               |"I'm Luke Skywalker;                    |
|       a.k.a. Redrum         |               I'm here to rescue you." |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
From: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Deckard WAS a replicant!
Date: 9 Nov 92 13:26:51 GMT
Reply-To: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Organization: University of NY at Albany

As I understand it, the theory that Deckard is a replicant is supported
by many segements of the film(sorry this is old news to everyone,
but I just joined and I saw a message by someone asking for the
rationale and no real answer to him)

One: At the start of the movie, Deckard had quit his job because
he was having trouble doing it.  He said something along the lines
that he used to not care about the replicants but now he was starting
to feel emotions towards them.  This fits in with the idea that replicants
start life with no emotions(no upbringing to tie them into) and start
to gain them towards the end, when they die.  The idea is that
Deckard is a replicant and starting to get a "concience"

Two: Towards the middle of the film, Deckard acquires some photos
from one of the rooms of one of the escapred replicants.  He
goes over these OLD photos with some high tech imaging, looking at
pictures in the mirror and all sorts of things.  These photo's have
NO relevance to his mission.  They will not help him to find the replicant.
The only reason I can think of for his fascination would be if he
was a replicant and the photo's jogged his own implanted memories(since
its a good bet that the memories are similiar for each replicant).  
There was also some shots of photo's of his on his desk(????) that may
of had similiar pictures(I never got a close look at them, so am not
sure)

Three: At the end of the movie, Deckard refers to Rachel as "special"
with "no termination date", implying that she won't die in 5 years
time like most replicants.  He then goes on to say that he doesn't know
how much time they will have together, implying that HE may be a replicant
and that he doesn't know how long he has to live.

Four: from what I heard, cut from the American version was a dream sequence
of deckards about a unicorn.  Some people have claimed that this ties in
with the origami unicorn left in his room by that other cop.  The theory being
that the other cop wouldn't know to leave a unicorn unless he knew Deckard was
a replicant with those memories about a unicorn(perhaps it was a warning to
Deckard that the other guy knew what he was and Deckard better leave
town???)

Its been a few years since I've seen the movie, do these hypotheses sound
reasonable to anyone else???
 
-Badger
   -GM1116@albnyvms
From: boro@colorix.ph2.uni-koeln.de (Rene Borowski)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: STAR WARS THEME
Date: 6 Nov 1992 13:10:30 GMT
Organization: II. Phys. Institute, University of Cologne, Germany
Distribution: world
Reply-To: boro@colorix.ph2.uni-koeln.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: colorix.ph2.uni-koeln.de

In article 75DD4580@vms.csd.mu.edu, 2715gibsonr@vms.csd.mu.edu () writes:
>HAS ANYBODY READ BOOK 8 RELATING TO THE STAR WARS THEME.  IT WAS THE BOOK
>RIGHT AFTER HEIR TO THE EMPIRE.  I WAS WONDERING IF ANYONE COULD TELL ME WHAT 
>THAT BOOK IS ABOUT.  ALSO, COULD SOMEONE TELL ME WHAT THE NAME OF BOOK 9 IS?


The name of book 9 is "Dark Force Rising"
A lot of infos are in the newsgroup rec.arts.sf.starwars
or in the wpi.wpi.edu ftp-server

"It's to late for me, son."

Bye

Rene


From: stachnik@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (George Stachnik)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:26:52 GMT
Subject: FLASH GORDON!
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies

All right, call me a hopeless nostalgia fan, but I've always
liked the Flash Gordon movies.  I'm not talking here about
the hideous Dino DeLaurentis remake - but the original
serials from the 1930s and 1940s with Buster Crabbe.  

I've been able to find the original serial (Flash Gordon),
and the third serial in the series (Flash Gordon Conquers
the Universe) on video.  But I've never been able to find
the best one of the series - "Flash Gordon's Trip to Mars".
(You may remember it as the film in which the clay people
made their debut...)

If anybody knows where or how I could find a copy of this
classic piece of sf, please email or post.  (I tried this
once a couple of years ago and got nothing...)

Anybody for Flash Gordon trivia?  Remember the name of the
actor who played Dr. Zarkov?  How many different actresses
played Dale Arden?  What color was her hair in each of the
three serials?  How many characters can you name that were
in all three serials?  How 'bout 2 out of 3?
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: I Liked Alien - again
Date: 5 Nov 92 09:45:29 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Nov4.135133.8612@ac.dal.ca>, by 01fortec@ac.dal.ca:
> Some things mankind was not meant to know, like how scriptwriters get around
> the reality of the universes they create, and how the public lets them do
> it. :-)

Close.  Actually, we're talking about scriptwriters getting
around the reality of the universes *others* have created in previous
films. :-)
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: pejulaju@sandman.cs.hut.fi (Pentti Lajunen)
Subject: Re: Blade Runner / Violence, quoestion
Reply-To: pejulaju@niksula.hut.fi (Pentti Lajunen)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:55:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.174345.7495@cc.tut.fi> jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana Kouhia) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.224402.25596@u.washington.edu>
>redrum@carson.u.washington.edu (Joe Stremick) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.204837.494@cc.tut.fi> jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana
>>Kouhia) writes:

>>>Does the director's cut 1992 of Blade Runner contain
>>>the violence in European release had?

>>	No, the extra seconds of violence are not seen in the
>>Director's Cut.  I was dissapointed.

>I'm disappointed too.

I'm not. Seeing both Criterion's and normal release versions I would
say I liked the normal release more. The film worked better without
these splatter effects. For example, Roy crunching Tyrell's head (I assume
no spoiler warning needed) was more effective with soundeffects only.

>By the way, the current Director's cut is not Ridley's,
>instead it is made by a film archive man at film company.
>Ridley's version was lost.

He did supervise the editing or that's what I've heard.
(or at least he was satisfied with the final edition.)

>Maybe Ridley's version did contain violence, but not archive mans?

Or maybe not.
From: mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk (Del Cotter)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien biology
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:32:01 GMT
Organization: Brunel University, West London, UK

In article <alien.00zg@acheron.amigans.gen.nz> Ross Smith writes:
>(2) Don't go outside the bounds of scientific plausibility (see below).
>
>[snip]
>
>The acid blood and (short term) vacuum survival aren't too outrageous, IMHO.
     ^^^^^^^^^^
     Oh, come on, I can't let that pass!  Do you you know what pH is?  Do you
know what it means?  Do you know the concentration of protons required to burn
through *two decks* of the Nostromo in as many minutes?  If you want to talk
about Alien biology, let's start with the composition of Alien blood.

>[snip]
>
>And one of the sources that I personally agree with is accepted scientific
>fact. If you're seriously claiming that we should ignore biological facts
>merely because a movie director says so, then I'm afraid we part company
>completely.

I don't know about *biological* facts, but I think the physical and chemical
absurdities in A3 (eg. Aliens jumping out of vats of molten lead) were 
allowed precisely *because* the director knew from the first two films that 
practically nothing is too outrageous for Alien fans to swallow.

>One reason I like the Alien movies, and speculations like this, so much is
>that the movies *don't* stray into fantasy (I like fantasy too, but not
>when it pretends to be SF). If Ridley Scott really did make claims like
>that, then it's obvious that the plausibility of the movie was just blind
>luck rather than (as I'd always assumed) care on his part. I wouldn't
>have started this thread if I hadn't been able to speculate without
>remaining consistent with both the movies *and* reality. Ignoring Scott's
>off-screen pontifications strikes me as a small price to pay for keeping
>our speculations within the bounds of reason.

Look.  I'm a fan of the Alien movies.  But they're *skiffy* movies.  They're
fantasy pretending to be SF.  The plausibility comes through willing sus-
pension of disbelief on the part of the fans, and that comes from the richness
of Scott's vision, not his scientific expertise.  Give the guy a break!

By all means speculate, but you've got a choice.  You can be consistent with
the movies *or* reality.  You can't be consistent with both, because they're
not consistent with each other.

>Maybe I should have posted to r.a.sf.science after all...

I wouldn't.  You'd probably have a harder time there than here.

If this looks like a flame, I'm sorry.  I promise you it isn't.  I'd make it
more tactful if tact was one of my skills.
-- 
 ',' ' ',','  |                                                  |  ',' ' ',','
   ', ,','    |       Del Cotter       mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk      |    ', ,','  
     ','      |                                                  |      ','