HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: QL: What happened to Ruthie?
Date: 7 Jan 1993 21:01:03 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, sll28@cc.usu.edu (Lorna Payne) says:

>In article <1993Jan7.023026.4373@ll.mit.edu>, mcbride@ll.mit.edu (Barbara McBride) writes:
>> 
>> |> 
>> |> 1975-1994  The other 4 wives.
>> |> 
>> |> Tina:  1995-1999.  Tina is mentioned early on in the show, which is set in
>> |> 1995.  She and Al are still together, and will be until he finds out about
>> |> the affair. 
>> |> 
>> 		What affair?
>
>Tina and Gooshie are having an affair.  Probably have been for some time.
>Al was suspicious at one time and blew his top, but things have calmed 
>down, for now.

Does anyone really think that Al is so stupid that he doesn't know about
it?  As far as I'm concerned, Al knows and just isn't saying anything. 
After all, who's he to talk about cheating lovers.

-- 
             Beth Hlabse    eah4@po.CWRU.Edu     Assistant Sysop
                The Science Fiction and Fantasy Sig (GO SCIFI)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If all the beasts were gone man would die from a great lonliness of the spirit.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: schumach@stortek.com (Kurt Schumacher)
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Reply-To: schumach@stortek.com
Organization: Storage Technology Corp
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:14:58 GMT

In article 14@microm.UUCP, kevin@microm.UUCP (Kevin Price) writes:
>And the babe pilot: Knowing her crew as well as she must, would she be 
>comfortable flying the ship in such a vulnarable position?
>I think not!

Perhaps, knowing her crew as well as she must, she knows that they will
treat her as a crewmate and a pilot, and not as a "babe".  Perhaps in the
future of Space Rangers, not everyone engages in sexist behavior.
	Kurt
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: tp0001@medtronic.COM (Terry Pinotti)
Subject: Re: The SciFi Channel stinks !! (was: Re: Does SciFi Channel cut episodes????)
Organization: Medtronic, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:34:38 GMT

: >The more I hear about the SciFi channel, the more I don't give
:  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >a damn that my local cable company doesn't carry it.
:  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I get the Sci-Fi channel and I read all the comments about how bad the
programs are. Well, I want to hear some comments about what they
should have on. If you count all the really good Sci-Fi, for whatever
reason, you will see that there is not enough out their to fill a
weekend's programming. And besides, what one person thinks is rotten
may be another persons favorite show. That is the best aspect of SF.
some people look for thoughtful social commentary and some want
shootem ups. 

I have found very bad programs that have had a very good message and I
have found great programs that said nothing. Who cares. It is still
better than twin peaks or Dynasty. It is all relative.

--
   Terry L. Pinotti       |  Compuserve = 76357,746 
Pinotti Consulting, Inc.  |  uunet tp0001@medtronic.com
    2832 Laport Dr.       |   Collector of cards
Mounds View, MN 55112     |   sport and non-sport
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: mll@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark Littlefield)
Subject: sat info needed
Reply-To: mll@aio.jesnet.jsc.nasa.gov
Organization: Lockheed ESC/NASA JSC
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 14:09:43 GMT

hi,

i'm posting this for a friend who doesn't have usenet access.  he
wants to know the satellite uplink information for space ranger and
babylon 5.  as neither he nor i read this group, please send replies
to:

stankuli@uwf.bitnet
stankuli%uwf.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu
or
mll@superman.jsc.nasa.gov

thanks in advance,

mark


-- 
=====================================================================
Mark L. Littlefield              Intelligent Systems Department
internet: mll@aio.jsc.nasa.gov 
USsnail:  Lockheed Engineering and Sciences 
          2400 Nasa Rd 1 / MC C-19            
          Houston, TX 77058-3711
====================================================================
From: barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: DS9 - What else?
Date: 12 Jan 1993 22:49:06 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: telecaster.think.com

In article <Fk29wB3w166w@hogbbs.scol.pa.us> crunch@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (Travis Prebble) writes:
>I've seen the first actual episode of DS9 (first after the pilot) and I 
>must say this: How did they let the doctor, Julian, get that high in the 
>Starfleet hierarchy?

How "high" is he?  He's stationed at a remote outpost that nobody really
cared much about until the wormhole was discovered.

He's a doctor, not a spy.
-- 
Barry Margolin
System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: rbrooks1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Robert William Brooks)
Subject: Highlander: "Mountain Men"
Reply-To: rbrooks1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Robert William Brooks)
Organization: Swarthmore College
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 04:55:20 GMT

Saw my first episode of Highlander, "The Mountain Men", a couple of nights
ago and wasn't very impressed.  Did I just catch a bad episode or are they   
all like this?

Still, I did enjoy seeing Wes Studi again after Last of the Mohicans :-)
-- 
Rob Brooks
rbrooks1@cc.swarthmore.edu

Selig sind, die da Leid tragen, denn sie sollen getrostet werden.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: GGPERRY@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU (ggreg)
Subject: Re: DS9 was very BAD
Organization: Northwestern University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:58:27 GMT

but the point is they DON'T pay any attention to the points you listed
either!
          ggreg
 
 
 
 
 
 
In article <6860@npri6.npri.com>
murphy@npri6.npri.com (David P. Murphy) writes:
 
>
>
>>       Paralleling Gallileo (who actually studied his subject) to
>>       the hack writers who write for ST (who, likely, have never
>>       studied any more science than you get in your typical comic book)
>>       is pretty pathetic.  These people aren't visionaries, they're
>>       deluded egomaniacs who can't be bothered with checking their work.
>>
>>rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
>
>may i point out that you are being unnecessarily insulting?  "these people"
>are TELEVISION WRITERS, and as such, their main goal is to *entertain*,
>not adhere to scientific accuracy.  obviously they are succeeding,
>since TNG and DS9 are getting high ratings.  calling them "deluded
>egomaniacs" is waaaayy out of line, and makes _you_ look rather petulant;
>they have to worry about *drama* and *plot* and *characterization* and
>*sets* and *lighting* and *which actors are available* and *fitting the
>whole she-bang into sixty minutes, carefully timed for commercials* and
>*getting the whole thing done by thursday* . . .  i very much doubt that
>these points you describe are of any great concern to either the producer,
>the director, or the writer in comparison to the points i just listed.
>so lay off, yamanari.
>
>sure, i wish they were better science-fiction writers, but apparently
>there's not much of a market for that on television :-)
>
>ok
>dpm
>--
>murphy@npri6.npri.com 602 Cameron St. Alexandria, VA 22314 (703) 683-9090
>
>              When every one is dead the Great Game is finished.  Not before.
>                              --- Hurree Babu, "Kim"
From: GGPERRY@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU (ggreg)
Subject: Re: DS9:I liked it, dammit.
Organization: Northwestern University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:25:56 GMT

yea, it's a worthy addition allright.  an addition to more of the same
old bad tv idea of "sci-fi."  great, maybe all these bad shows will inspire
more bad shows, and more and more and more!  maybe they'll even resurrect
battewhore gaspactica and fuck rudgers!  or better yet, maybe those star
trek producer genius's will do a spinoff show starring lt. trois mother!
i cannot wait, let me tell ya!  more brilliant, stimulating, imaginative
american television sci-fi!
                           ggreg
 
In article <Jan.8.16.16.35.1993.12724@andromeda.rutgers.edu>
detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) writes:
 
>
>carrie@plasma1.ssl.berkeley.edu (Carrie Roller) writes:
>
>>Yes, I enjoyed DS9.
>
>So did I, it reminded me of the first time I sat and saw "Encounter
>at Farpoint".
>
>>I thought the show did an excellent job of developing
>>several very complex characters, though  many of you appear to feel
>>that they are all rip-offs of someone-or-another.
>
>I was especially impressed in the manner the characters were introduced
>and the humor in most of them.  There is also a serious side to DS9, we
>will see a great deal of this in the characters from Bajor.  Sisko's
>character has great potential, as does the young (and pretty) actress
>who is the host body for the Trill called Dax.
>
>>I noticed that most of the postings regarding
>>DS9 were fairly whiny and very often were written by people who are
>>STILL crying about how ST:TNG isn't as good as the original.  Get
>>a grip, guys.  No one is forcing you to watch.
>
>I was not on the net when ST:TNG hit the airways, but I do remember
>many people bitching about how weak the show was and how it could never
>match up to the original.
>
>ST:TNG is a worthy successor to ST:TOS, and ST:DS9 is a welcome
>addition to the Science Fiction Family.
>
>And, as you indicated, if you are not happy with the program, change
>the channel, I hear there is another attempt at SF TV on CBS.
>
>
>
>--
>David De Trolio                     (detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu)
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>We can have increased revenue in the United States without punishing
>those who have obtained economic success and personal achievement.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: sdr57@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Space Rangers Review.....
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:39:14 GMT

First of all, the science in this show was, how shall I
say it...I guess nonsense is the best way to put it. I
suppose that the use of scientific terms is supposed to
give an air of versimulitude to the idea we are in the far
future, but... (I won't dwell on this. I suspect that if
it becomes a hit people will start explaining it away -
the hero threatening the bad guy with a prison stretch
measured in "klicks" - a term for kilometer - will doubtless
be passed off as a sly homage to the famous Star Wars gaffe
about the speed of the Millenium Falcon, for instance).
If anyone from CBS is reading this, I bet you could get
a science-literate fan to review your scripts for proper
use of terms really cheap. Think about it.

The plot was not anything new, either, and the quality of
the acting was distinctly variable.

Having said these nasty things, I have to say that I liked it.
I suspect it will be one of my guilty pleasures. The story kept
moving briskly, some of the one-liners weren't bad, and I
was entertained. In fact (and this will raise the wrath of
many, I'm sure), IMHO if only one of Deep Space Nine and
Space Rangers is renewed, I'd rather it be Space Rangers that
survives. Deep Space Nine, while it had better production values,
was too caught up in the tragedies of all to be entertaining to
me - it moved much more slowly than Space Rangers did. Of course,
in the best of worlds, both programs will survive, and *get better.*

******************************************************************************
Renegade academician. They're a dangerous breed when they go feral,
academics are...a chemist, too.
		    -(James P. Blaylock in "Lord Kelvin's Machine")

My organization hasn't agreed with any of my opinions so far, and
I doubt they'll start now.

Stanley Roberts
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: SF on TV
From: obie@hirama.hiram.edu
Date: 10 Jan 93 15:56:47 -0500
Organization: Hiram College
Nntp-Posting-User: obie

In article <1ipnosINNras@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, eek2@po.CWRU.Edu (Eric E. Katz) writes:
> 
> I agree with you about most of the things, but I think Max 
> Headroom was pretty unique for any SF show.  I may be one of the 
> biggest Max fans in existence, but the show was original.  Some of
> the plots were far-fetched, but what they represented was cool.  
> Instead of bringing in limitless number of alien species almost all
> of which were bipedal and was either distinctly male or female, it 
> took the stories from conflicts in the network and the new hierachy
> of people who run the world which is now based on television.
	I agree with you! I hated to see that show die so rapidly. It, to me, 
was what good SF is about! Take some situation that exists today, project into
the future a bit, and see what life will be like as a result. But, I never
met a person that had anything good to say about the show- except for SF
fans.
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------
|Obie Slotterbeck     Hiram College      obie@hirama.hiram.edu |
|   "There Can Be Only One!"   (Why couldn't it be Duncan???)  |
|      Highlander:The Series                                   |      
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
Subject: Re: QL: Two-Faced Reviews: A Tale of Two Sweeties
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 09:38:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.022522.10600@grebyn.com>, billones@grebyn.com (Jeremy Billones) writes:
> 
> This posting contains spoilers for the 1/5 episode of Quantum Leap.
> 
> First, a disclaimer.  WRC in Washington, DC cut out for about 5 minutes.
> I missed everything from the sunrise (right after the 8:30 break) to the
> "get away from the window" quote.

I think NBC must have been having problems, we lost signal twice, to be
replaced with a WMAQ (Chicago) screen, once at what I thought was a commercial
break, and again for a few seconds shortly after returning.

Personally, I still find the missing end of words on the handlink to be
amusing.

> 
> The gangsters were almost a relief.  ALMOST.  Sheesh, I thought the main
> plot was done to death; this subplot got exhumed just for this episode.
> As for the "gambling for personal gain" bit, I guess they forgot about
> "The Right Hand of God."  Or the fact that it wasn't personal.  (Oh, it
> was a joke?  I dare anybody to tell me they laughed aloud.  *That* would
> be funny.)

I agree.  What personal gain?  It's helping the leapee, isn't it?
Also, wouldn't it be useful to set up a permanent source of funding for the
project?

-- 
jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I want peace on earth, and goodwill towards man."
"We don't do that kind of thing, we're the United States Government!"
  -- from _Sneakers_
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: pdchapin@unix.amherst.edu (PAUL D CHAPIN)
Subject: Re: _Space Rangers_ (pilot's position)
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:09:31 GMT

Craig Becker (jlpicard@austin.ibm.com) wrote:
: 
: Sure, I can dig it: there's lots of advantages to being prone while
: piloting. But gee, it would sure make alot more sense if one were
: lying on one's _back_.
: 
We're talking space here. Up and Down determined by acceleration.  Given
how the others were sitting, she was looking sideways in relationship to
the direction of travel.  And to do that she had to tilt her head back.  If
she let her head hang at the natural angle for a prone position, she would 
have been looking backwards.

They should have put her in the correct orientation to the craft for stress
purposes, then had her pilot from screens mounted in front of her face.  This
would involved her facing sideways in relationship to the flight path, but
I don't think you're going to get a lot of visual flying at the speeds
involved.  In fact, manual piloting seems a little silly.  

I give them credit for trying to do something new, but it didn't work.  Mostly
they did nothing new, and none of it worked.  Six weeks, tops.
From: wixer!cactus.org!wixer!pro-smof.cts.com!rfletcher@cactus.org (Robert Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Space Ranger Review.....
Date: 9 Jan 1993 04:41:37 -0600
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

  The start of the show was not unlike the feel of a "Ice Priate" type
show. But I am going to have to agree with you and say that the show was
not good. The plot fell flat to quickly and did not get back up. If this is
to be a tounge in cheek type show, then someone needs to write smarter
scripts.
----
ProLine:  rfletcher@pro-smof
Internet: rfletcher@pro-smof.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher
ARPA:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher@nosc.mil
From: vincent@cad.gatech.edu (Vincent Fox)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: MST3K should invade TNT's 100% weird time slot!
Date: 10 Jan 1993 14:32:20 -0500
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology, CAE/CAD Lab
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: cae.cad.gatech.edu

I was watching something the other night on TNT. I forget the name,
but it had your typical 50's B-plot about our macho astronauts who
end up on the planet Venus. Venus naturally has only attractive young
women wearing short dresses and high heels. What was particularly
hysterical to me was seeing the guys get captured by a field-unit
of women parading around in the jungle with those short dresses and
high heels. Oh, and it had a Gabor sister too.

So anyway, I'm sitting here trying to enjoy it but I keep expecting
3 little figures down front to make comments. Pretty soon I'm voicing
out the kinds of things Joel and the 'bots might say. Eventually though
I tired of this and reeled up some taped MST3K when I realized that
was what I really wanted to see. 100% Weird is a good try in that they
have the kind of movies that would be funny. But it's pale next to MST3K.
Who can watch movies that bad without some friends to make fun of it all?

If MST3K invaded TNT's slot, my friends without the Comedy Channel could
finally become addicts as well. And a good invasion would give the Mads
something to do.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: baylor@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: QL: What happened to Ruthie?
Reply-To: baylor@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 22:17:01 GMT

In article <1ilg2mINNo0j@mirror.digex.com>, kilroy@access.digex.com (Donna Lettow) writes:
>
>I always suspected Tina wasn't very bright.  I mean, face it, given a choice
>between sleeping with Gooshie and sleeping with Al, who would you choose?

Maybe Tina has no sense of smell, and feels sorry for Gooshie?

I can't believe Al hasn't caught onto her & dumped her (socially) by 
now! Just his luck, Al finally seems inclined to be monogamous,
and the girl is NOT.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: donnell@tuna.micro.umn.edu (BogusMan)
Subject: Re: B5: Some Babylon 5 discussion on the net?
Organization: none
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:29:07 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.193654.1996@netcom.com> wisner@netcom.com (Bill Wisner) writes:
>>	Ah, so is TNG going out of production after this season?
>
>Well, maybe.  It hasn't officially been cancelled, but contract negotiations
>between Paramount and the stars are becoming increasingly difficult.  Don't
>be too surprised if this turns out to be its last season.
>
>This is why Paramount is hoping very strongly that DS9 succeeds.
>
>w.

I have heard repeatedly, but not lately, that TNG is planning a one season\
hiatus after this one. We will see.

Pax
					--Judex--
From: Dave_Wetzel@vos.stratus.com (David Wetzel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: B5 in Boston/Providence?
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.tv
Date: 7 Jan 1993 16:15:32 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: dwetzel.mis.stratus.com

Anyone know where and when B5 will be running on Boston or Providence
stations?

Thanks,
Dave_Wetzel@vos.stratus.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: valmont@hardy.u.washington.edu (Monsieur de Valmont)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Computer Effects (Was Re: Space Rangers !!Spoilers (I guess)!!)
Date: 7 Jan 1993 10:32:08 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.u.washington.edu

In article <1993Jan7.035335.26532@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> pjm6z@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Dave Lister) writes:
>
>[There were] problems with Space Rangers.  Let's look at some of them.
>
>1) They used computers to draw the ship of the Space Rangers.  Thus 
>   we never got to see the kind of shot a model can give (my guess is that
>   the ship design isn't quite completely drawn or finished).  They
>   did the Hope Fort (or whatever) in computer animation as well making it

	[Other points deleted]

>with every other sci-fi
>show (Quantum Leap, ST:TNG, ST:DS9, and Highlander) around and Babylon
>5 (please god let it be good) coming this show doesn't stand a chance.

	If you're this biased against computer animation, I have 
	no clue why you're looking forward to "Babylon 5."  :)   The 
	effects in "Space Rangers" might be lousy, but don't be so 
	quick to write off computer animation entirely -- we're going 
	to see it used to wonderful effect in B5, if the promotional 
	videos they're putting out are any indication.  You won't 
	get "the kind of shot a model can give" -- you're going to 
	get something *better.*   Prepare to be impressed.   

-- 
Michael Montoure \ valmont@hardy.u.washington.edu / Keeper of the Red Dwarf FAQ
   ``Dehydration - 34%, Recollection of previous evening - 2%, embarrassment
     factor - 91%.  Advise repair schedule: off line for 36 hours, re-boot
    startup disk, and replace head ... I've got to stop reading Usenet ...''
From: wixer!cactus.org!wixer!pro-smof.cts.com!rfletcher@cactus.org (Robert Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Space Rangers
Date: 9 Jan 1993 04:41:41 -0600
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

  What android character?  Maybe you are mixing Deep Space Nine with Space
Rangers.
----
ProLine:  rfletcher@pro-smof
Internet: rfletcher@pro-smof.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher
ARPA:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher@nosc.mil