HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Quantum Leap = Old Dr. Who?
Date: 23 Nov 92 01:06:06 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1eok25INNc9b@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> ST101229@brownvm.brown.edu (Charon) writes:

>Anyone watch Quantum Leap nowadays?  IMHO, it's extremely stupid, but most of
>my friends seem to love it.
>     I tried explaining why, and eventually figured out that I thought it was
>a Dr. Who without the history and tradition.  If I weren't a Who fan, I'd have
>all sorts of criticisms of the show...but I feel like they're exempted by the
>fact that the show has _always_ been like that.  Quantum Leap, on the other
>hand, started out where Dr. Who was several years ago...when it had already
>been running for several years.  Opinions?

>     -Charon <st101229@brownvm.brown.edu>

Admittedly, as a college student, I haven't been watching the latest season,
but I think you're trashing one of the better shows on American television
unfairly.  You need to remember two things:

1.)  Quantum Leap is very deceiving; it will fool you by masquerading as a
science fiction show.  *It is not sci-fi at all.*  It is, in fact, an
anthology show, and a damn good one at that.  Similarly, the Twilight Zone
was not truly science fiction in the space-opera tradition.  Both shows
simply use(d) sci-fi premises to present their exploration of
character/issues (Quantum Leap) and theme/philosophy (Twilight Zone).
	QL and Dr. Who have only one thing in common: time travel.  They are
completely different shows.

2.) And this is the kicker: QL is a lot better than anything else on
American TV these days.  Really.

Drewcifer
-- 
****************************************************************************
*  Andrew David Simchik *  DISCLAIMER: I said it... 			   *
*  a.k.a. Drewcifer     *  			No one else would!	   *							   *
****************************************************************************
From: maujs@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr J D Morris)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: TARDISy things
Date: 18 Nov 1992 12:57:18 -0000
Organization: Computing Services, University of Warwick, UK
NNTP-Posting-Host: clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk

In article <1992Nov18.095307.22171@cs.ucf.edu> wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson) writes:

>1) The Doctor enters the TARDIS without going through the door...
	Various objects and people have appeared inside the Tardis
on several occasions without using the door:
	The Keeper Of Traken	A dematerialization circuit
	Junk Mail		Some woman who fell into the Timelash
	A police box		Sutekh
>
>2) The professor's TARDIS materializes IN A WALL...>
>Tom
	Since the professor's TARDIS exterior is just a door, nothing more,
	nothing less, it would only have to materialize next to
	the wall to give the impression that that it was, apparently,
	a door in the wall leading somewhere. For more information
	about Chronotis's Tardis, read 'Dirk Gently'...

						Jonathan Morris
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik)
Subject: Re: Who'd make a good Who?
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 20:38:24 GMT

In <1992Nov17.181739.5483@lsa.umich.edu> kausch@med.umich.edu (David Kausch) writes:


>Instead of Sly Stallone or (give me a break) K Costner, how about the 
>vivacious William Hurt?  Or worse yet, Patrick Swazye?

UGH!  Stop!  I can't take any more!  :)

If we want to get really silly, how about Stephen Seagal or Jean-Claude Van
Damme?

Or just about any standup comedian.  Or can you imagine Billy Crystal as the
Doctor?

OK, OK, here's a real thought to redeem this posting.  After seeing
_Dracula_, many people recommended Anthony Hopkins.  What about Gary Oldman? 
An absolutely incomparable actor, there.

-- 
****************************************************************************
*  Andrew David Simchik *  DISCLAIMER: I said it... 			   *
*  a.k.a. Drewcifer     *  			No one else would!	   *							   *
****************************************************************************
From: ph9991_manfr@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Movie
Date: 23 Nov 92 16:45:00 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin - River Falls

That wasn't a flame...  that was Hell itself....


It seems that someone has posted up the movie script we've been talking
about and lamenting over recently.  
While I can live with (and did myself) flamings of a script and brief
descriptions of the plotline to justify the arguments, I have to object
to that script posting too, in light of recent information that we have
seen on the net.

If that were indeed the genesis of what will hopefully become the
Doctor Who Movie then I wouldn't be talking about this right now 
as I'd say "Yes, post it, it sucked and we can't let it be made."
However, BEFORE that happened, news came to us all that the script
I talked had been rejected.  So why did this someone post the script? 
It's a dead issue now; that isn't going to be the movie!
Mr. Byrne was absolutely (and may I say very entertainingly) right in
what he said when he mentioned the possible repurcussions this could
have on the negotiations and financial backing.

That movie is dead.  The movie being discussed now is much more faithful
to the TV series, and as such, it deserves our support.  

So please, Mr Someone, don't post the rest of it.  Beating a dead horse
will only pour blood over current negotiations.  

I should point out, however, that I still do not like that script even
one little bit.  But as I said, that is now a moot point as it will
never happen.  

Steven.K.Manfred
From: bradshaw@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jonathan Bradshaw)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Visions 92 - Please Repost
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:43:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: mentor.BxtIGs.1ur
Organization: Purdue University

Could someone repost the Visions 92 blurb such as WHERE it is... <grin> Yes,
I accidently RM'd my copy...

-- 
 Jonathan Bradshaw | jonathan@nova.decio.nd.edu -or- jbradsh2@darwin.cc.nd.edu
  Packet: n9oxe@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na | Prodigy: XMSN02B | (Os/2)(DOS)(Linux)
  WNDU-AM/FM/TV South Bend, IN | Disclaimer "My opinions are not my employers"
  - "Busy life, not enough time to look in the mirror." - Deborah Ann Gibson -
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: echristo@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Elena A Christofides)
Subject: test
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:47:37 GMT

This is only a test, please ignore.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: jchilton@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Jeffrey E. Chilton)
Subject: New Scientist and the Daemons
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:02:59 GMT


Could somebody please tell me the date of the New Scientist issue
discussing the Daemons.

Thanks,
Jeff Chilton
chilton@iowa.physics.uiowa.edu
From: ph9991_manfr@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Happy Anniversary!
Date: 23 Nov 92 03:16:35 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - River Falls


              

November the 23rd has come to England, and thus I wish everyone a happy
Doctor Who 29th Anniversary!

Yes, it is a holiday, and like all holidays there are rites to observe...
if you can..
a) watch "An Unearthly Child" sometime today (episode one at least)
b) tell someone who doesn't know what today is what today is
c) choose one of the Anniversary specials and perhaps watch that
d) Abstain from all food except for jelly babies, celery, and tea
e) Post a happy anniversary message to the net yourself.

that's all I can think of.

Once again, Happy 29th!


With a hat tipped in farewell,
Steven.K.Manfred
From: 1-4514@tardis.cojones.com (The Dm #1 @4514)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: the doctor is...     
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 01:51:44 GMT

 -=> Quoting Cleveland.freenet.edu (bi to All <=-

 C(> I dont think so. There seems to be too much evidence that suggests
 C(> otherwise. I do however think that the Doctor might have been a
 C(> contemporary of Rassilon's, perhaps he was an apprentice(sp?) of
 C(> Rassilon when he was a relatively young Gallifreyian. I've also
 C(> been convinced by another fan of Doctor Who that the TARDIS the 
 C(> Doctor "borrowed" to leave Gallifrey was originally the property
 C(> of Rassilon.

 C(> Any other opinions?

I would have some difficulty with this idea because of the fact that the 
Master and the Rani have both admitted that they were contempary students
with the Doctor when he went by his original Gallifreyan name.  So no I don't
Think that the Doctor could be a contemparary of Rassilon, although I will
credit the idea of his tardis having been used by Rassilon, the Doctor and 
others imply that the type 40 that he stole I mean borrowed had been 
decomisioned when he borrowed it.  Some of Hartnells and Troughtons comments 
give the impression that he left Gallifrey very quickly and had no intention
of ever returning.

        The DM

trust me, I'm your friend

... Ya want a stupid answer?  Ask me anything!
--- Blue Wave/QWK v2.10
                         
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: torresce@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Carlos E. Torres)
Subject: Re: The Doctor is...
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 16:33:05 GMT

Dave Horlick <drh2@cornell.edu> writes:
>Well, this is not something I am clear on. If Gallifrey did exist in our
>time, what's stopping a spaceship from just heading on over there and
>taking it over? And Sutek recognizing the TimeLords proves only that
>there are many renegades who make their presence known throughout time
>and space.

I'm not sure what you're saying here???  The TimeLords have had their barrier up
for a very long time (atleast thousands).  How could a mere spaceship head
over there as you say and just take it over just like that.  First of all,
even before they inducted their barrier - they were a force to contend with 
b'cse of their knowledge.  After all, the TimeLords must have been atleast 
somewhat devious (as a race) to create and play games using the Time Scoop /
Death Zone, etc...  But regardless of this, their barrier has been up for
a very, very long time.
		Mystic
(alex.soto@analog.com)
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Thanks a lot you dip . . .
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 06:16:58 MST
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada

wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson) writes:

- In an article misnamed as "Yeah, I read that in a fanzine  . . . "
- 1-1@tardis.cojones.com (Peter W. Losher) wrote:
- > Regarding Message : Re: McCoys portrayal of the Doctor
-
- I really wanted to skip these stupid McCoy and/or Ace threads, but you keep
- changing the subject without changing the topic. You obviously have control
- over the subject line...leave it alone.
-
- You're acting like Dave when he put DSY in all the subjects. Can't remember
- the threads you follow? You even told me in e-mail that you were leaving the
- subjects alone. Am I the only one this is bothering? I'd like to skip the
- trash discussion and go to less opinionated stuff.
-
- Annoyed once again,
- Tom

  Hey Tom, is there ANYTHING that would make you less antagonistic??!!

Dave Shariff Yadallee (B. Sc. (Econ/Math) (U of Alberta 1990) )
 (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca, userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
American (n) - A person resident or born on the Continient of America
From: ph9991_manfr@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Dracula
Date: 15 Nov 92 23:40:31 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - River Falls

In article <Bxs4yJ.1p3@acsu.buffalo.edu>, perl@acsu.buffalo.edu (David T Perl) writes:
> 
> 
> 	I just saw the new Dracula movie the other day and after watching it I
> feel that Anthony Hopkins would make a good Doctor Who.  Has anyone else seen
> it yet and agree with me?
> 
> -- 
> 			     ---David---
> 			perl@acsu.buffalo.edu
> "If I knew everything that was going to happen, where would all the fun be."
> 		           ---The Doctor---


Yes!  I do.  He would be an interesting Doctor....and can probably do wonders
against the Haemovores and would get along well with the Androgums....

Steven.K.Manfred
Organization: William Rainey Harper College; Palatine, IL  60067
Date: Friday, 20 Nov 1992 12:35:49 CST
From: Steve W Hill <SHILL@HARPERVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Who'd make THE BEST Who???
 <1992Nov19.183320.10554@lsa.umich.edu> <pnz1m9#@rpi.edu>

Nicol Williamson.
Ian Holm.
Johnathan (sp?) Pryce.
Derek Jacobi.


Steve Hill                                       SHILL@HARPERVM.BITNET
Data Communications Technician           William Rainey Harper College
Information Systems department         1200 W Algonquin Rd Palatine IL
-------"No one in power taking blame."-----Skinny Puppy---------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: danaf@bray1a.its.rpi.edu (Frank R. Dana Jr.)
Subject: Re: Who'd make THE BEST Who???
Reply-To: danaf@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 05:14:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.123723.6444@gw.wmich.edu>, 92anderson@gw.wmich.edu writes:

[speculation on the BEST next Doctor deleted...]

|> would be cool. Or Michael Caine.  (Who said Twiggy?!?!)  :)

Hmm.. Michael Caine. I actually considered that for a while. Here's another 
idea that will get a lot of people mad at me...

John Lithgow.

Granted, we've never seen him playing anything really close to that type of
role, but I caught an interview with him on some cable channel recently and
it just hit me... "he'd make a great Doctor!".

I missed Raising Caine at the campus theatre this weekend. I'll have to rent
it and take a look before I make my final decision.

|> 					J.C. Anderson

-- 
/////////////////////////[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
(718)             (212)                        (516)             (518)
=======Amiuser============Frank R. Dana, Jr.============Doc Ami=======     
--------My opinions rarely reflect those of any sane person,----------
	   living, dead, or undead... that's gonna CHANGE.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: cevans@nyx.cs.du.edu (Clay Evans)
Subject: Re: YOUR STORY
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 15:37:01 GMT

doug.vermes%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Doug Vermes) writes:


>Interestingly enough, I have been posting my Doctor Who: ST:TNG Story
>for the past few days in the RIME Doctor Who conference. Though it bears
>no resemblence to yours-- mine is with the 7th Doctor and Ace...
>However, Wesley Crusher, Picard, Riker, Data, Worf, Troi, La Forge,
>O'Brien, etc.. are all there! If anyone wants to read it, I'll post it
>ALL at once.... But let me know if you are interested. (On the Rime
>conference I'm posting about 60 lines a day.....Keeping up the suspense!
><Grin>)
>       - Doug

>-------------------------------
>doug.vermes%acc1bbs@ssr.com
>                                                                    
Consider me interested!

The Doctor

Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: jasstev@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (stevens jason)
Subject: Re: Who'd make a goo Who?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 22:14:32 GMT

psrought@eos.ncsu.edu (PATRICK SCOTT ROUGHTON) writes:

>In article <1992Nov16.105255.1384@dct.ac.uk>, mcsdc1gs@dct.ac.uk writes:
>|> 
>|> 	With reference to all the names who've been put forward
>|> 	regarding who'd make a goo Dr Who... personally, I'd like
>|> 	to see Sylvester McCoy continue. I'd also like to see what
>|> 	Colin Baker could do with a few half-decent scripts and a
>|> 	better costume! I think Colin would surprise quite a few people
>|> 	if he was given better material to work with.
>|> 
>|> 	If none of these were possible, I think Ron Moody would make a
>|> 	good Doctor.
>|> 
>|> 	But that's just my 'umble opinion... 

>	I haven't seen the list, but I think Jeremy Brett would make
        a great Doctor

	MMM...this is a widely held view in British fandom (Brett was voted 
	the fans favourite two years back I think) but this is a bigggg
        mistake. Why? Brett may be a very good actor but HE IS Sherlock
	Holmes, I cannot see hi Dr being wildly different, nor - and this is
	the important bit -- could I see the audience identifying him as the
	Doctor, because he is Sherlock Holmes (Exactly my problem!)
	The choice of Brett would be a total disaster for the ratings in a
	new show.
	A sensible and affordable choice of a tv detective is John Thaw,
	what do you think of that?

	Jason.
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Tuesday, 17 Nov 1992 16:36:24 EST
From: <IO21145@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho,
Subject: Your firsts

I would like to hear how some of my fellow "Whovians" were
first introduced into the series - It was quite a powerfull
experience for me (or as powerfull as a child might imagine!)
when I watched "Genesis of The Daleks" on channel 2. It was
the best show I'd ever seen ! - The mystery of the whole series
was a joy to unravel, to get to know the doctor and his interesting
happenings. In short - it's the last Televison show I'll watch!
But anyway, I'd like to hear from anyone on this...


   Scorby...
From: morgans@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Who'd make a goo Who?
Date: 17 Nov 92 21:48:52 -0600
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <1992Nov17.135923.24116@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik) writes:

> By the way, share with the ignorant:  what does "smegging" mean?
> 

From the infamous series "Red Dwarf" - has had 5 seasons on the BBC, the 
infamous science fiction story of the future, starring Craig Charles, Danny 
John-Jules (?), Chris Barrie, and Richard Llewylln (?).  The exact 
definition of the word is debatable, but that is part of the enjoyment.

Craig Charles would make a rather interesting Doctor - Dread-locks, 
backwards cap, smoking, "care for a chicken vindaloo jelly-baby?", "oh no! 
Not the smegging Daleks!  Chrikies!"

Later

Siobahn (Shabang) Morgan

Have you hugged your Hologram today?
From: doug.vermes%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Doug Vermes) 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: YOUR STORY
Date: 19 Nov 92 19:20:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Advanced Computer Concepts BBS, New Rochelle, NY 914-654-1981
Reply-To: doug.vermes%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Doug Vermes) 


Interestingly enough, I have been posting my Doctor Who: ST:TNG Story
for the past few days in the RIME Doctor Who conference. Though it bears
no resemblence to yours-- mine is with the 7th Doctor and Ace...
However, Wesley Crusher, Picard, Riker, Data, Worf, Troi, La Forge,
O'Brien, etc.. are all there! If anyone wants to read it, I'll post it
ALL at once.... But let me know if you are interested. (On the Rime
conference I'm posting about 60 lines a day.....Keeping up the suspense!
<Grin>)
       - Doug

-------------------------------
doug.vermes%acc1bbs@ssr.com
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Jelly Baby Art
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 05:46:50 MST
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Attention fellow Whovians.  I found this on on s.c.b.  NJOY!!

prodger@leland.Stanford.EDU (phillip prodger) writes:

-
- How to make Jelly Baby art (A Baker's dozen):
-
- 1.    Jelly Babies are art.  (No reworking required)
-                      ^^^
- 2.    Bite Jelly Babies into constituent parts (head, torso,
-       legs, arms etc.).  Re-arrange and stick together as appropriate.
-       Attempt anatomically correct Jelly Baby.
-
- 3.    Bite several Jelly Babies into constituent parts.  Fun n'
-       thrills mixin' and matchin' colours.  "Benetton Jelly Baby" etc.
-
- 4.    Bite several Jelly Babies into constituent parts and assemble
-       into one gi-normous Jelly Baby.  Desirable effects:  monster
-       Jelly Baby, Satan/demon Jelly Baby etc.
-
- 5.    Procedures 2,3,4 above may be performed with scalpel etc. for
-       convincing, surreal Jelly Baby effects... e.g. Lime Jelly
-       Baby with Blackcurrent eyes etc.
-
- 6.    Procedures 2,3,4 may be performed with blunt instrument for
-       urban realism effect.
-
- 7.    Melt Jelly Baby with lighter, matches etc.  Control is of the
-       essence here.  Attempt twisted Jelly Baby, Jelly Baby in hell etc.
-       "Jelly Baby carbon face" is a perennial crowd-pleaser.
-
- 8.    Microwave Jelly Baby for Jelly Baby puddle/river/lake/amorph etc.
-       or microwave lighlty for subtle "warm Jelly Baby" effect.
-
- 9.    Dip Jelly Baby in handy liquid.  Squash Baby, Cola Baby,
-       Scrumpy Baby, Jelly Baby in Bitter and and Ginger Beer Baby are
-       known favourites.  Note textural changes to Jelly Baby exoskeleton.
-       Sentimental favourite:  Jelly Baby dipped in tea.
-
- 10.   Sink Jelly Baby in handy liquid.  Fish bowl effect...e.g.
-       Frogman Jelly Baby etc.  Interesting lighting effects as
-       in "yellow Jelly Baby drowning in orange liquid".
-
- 11.   Compress Jelly Baby in palm of hand, under foot etc.
-       Note textural transfer/potential mangling effect.
-
- 12.   Remove selected surfaces of Jelly Baby parts, fold n'stick.
-       Observe Jelly Baby fellating self, Jelly Baby ring n' Jelly
-       Baby hand-hold chain (as on package).
-
- 13.   Jelly Babies are art.
-                    ^^^
-
- Pundits suggest Jelly Baby dancing, Jelly Baby performance art, Jelly
- Baby symphony, Jelly Baby theatre etc.
-
- These procedures, whilst conceptually interesting, regrettably cannot
- be recommended at this time.
-
- -T'ain' th'urtlin' o'er th'edges what 'urts th'orses 'ooves.
-
-
-
-
-


Dave Shariff Yadallee (B. Sc. (Econ/Math) (U of Alberta 1990) )
 (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca, userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
American (n) - A person resident or born on the Continient of America
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: rkimmel@stein.u.washington.edu (Robert Kimmel)
Subject: Re: Quantum Leap = Old Dr. Who?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 23:56:46 GMT

In article <1eok25INNc9b@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> ST101229@brownvm.brown.edu (Charon) writes:
>Anyone watch Quantum Leap nowadays?  IMHO, it's extremely stupid, but most of
>my friends seem to love it.
>     I tried explaining why, and eventually figured out that I thought it was
>a Dr. Who without the history and tradition.  If I weren't a Who fan, I'd have
>all sorts of criticisms of the show...but I feel like they're exempted by the
>fact that the show has _always_ been like that.  Quantum Leap, on the other
>hand, started out where Dr. Who was several years ago...when it had already
>been running for several years.  Opinions?
>
>     -Charon <st101229@brownvm.brown.edu>

I actually find that Quantum Leap is a pretty good show.  I was just thinking
the other day about it's similarties to Dr. Who, but they don't really have
that much.  The guy of quantum leap can only travel in his lifetime.  not   
before he was born, and not far past when he started doing the leaps.
I suppose that he has no control over where he goes and he always has to
fix stuff can be related to the doctors controll over his tardis and so on,
but that's about it.