HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: goudswaa@fraser.sfu.ca (Peter Goudswaard)
Subject: ST:TUC interesting note
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:28:01 GMT

This may have already been discussed, and if it was, my apologies.
Did anyone else find it strange that just after the crew from the
Klingon battlecruiser Kronos I beamed to the Enterprise for dinner
and left the transporter room, the two guards were discussing the
smell of the Klingons.  Suddenly they were confronted by the Vulcan
female officer (forget her name), who said, "do you two have work?"
They said, "Yes, ma'am."  Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't female
Vulcan (and perhaps all female) officers called "sir"?  Seemed
suspicious at the time.

Then, watching the video, I discovered why.  Those two guards were
the ones who beamed over to the Kronos I with the magnetic boots and
assasinated the Klingons.  If you look closely, they are the two
that are lying dead in the hall, the ones that Kirk said something
like "...the first rule of assassination -- kill the assassins."


-- 
                                   _________                     _________
P*.*                              |         |      __/^\__      |         |
                                  |         |      \     /      |         |
         Peter Goudswaard         |         |   _/\_\   /_/\_   |         |
         goudswaa@sfu.ca          |         |   >           <   |         |
         pgoudswa@cue.bc.ca       |         |    >_________<    |         |
                                  |_________|         |         |_________|

         Or if you feel really lucky:  peterg@quesnel.education.gov.bc.ca
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 27 Aug 92 20:58:16 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <3ycnscd@lynx.unm.edu>, by lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble):
> exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek) writes:
>> ...in war one should expect the unexpected. Always have a backup.
>> There should have been at least another pilot on the Sulaco, just for
>> emergencies. To assume that two separated vehicles cannot both become
>> casualities is pure insanity. 
 
> It wasn't "war" -- it was a possible downed transmitter on some backwater
> planet being colonized by a Weyland-Yutani terraforming team.  

Exactly.  A possible emergency.  And emergencies are what you try to
plan for.  If you don't expect to have to shoot at somebody, you don't
send the military.  Anyway, if the transmitter had been down because
of thoroughly unintelligent meteorites raining from the sky in the
equatorial regions of the planet for one year every 200 years, the
situation would have been the same.
-- 
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
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:6844 rec.arts.movies:26601
From: wwr@calmasd.prime.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: SOMETHING OTHER ALIENS TALK (fave films on video)
Date: 2 Sep 92 18:43:04 GMT
Organization: Computervision - A Division of Prime Computer

To: those of you on rec.arts.sf.movies...

AARRGGHHH!!! I'm an airhead!! Ignore this post!!  I'm sorry!!  I have no
asbestos undies! Please spare me, I am innocent in ignorance!!!

To: those of you on rec.arts.movies (note the absence of the ".sf")

Please, feel free to puruse this posting and respond at your liesure.  Thank
you for flying with us today; please, make us your choice again.  Thank you,
enjoy your stay.


In article <1992Sep2.093107.735@calmasd.prime.com>, wwr@calmasd.prime.com writes:
> This net is getting kinda' bogged down on limited subjects, so to spice it up
> I thought that I would post some of my favorite films that are out on video
> (and you may not have seen).
> 
> Pastime -- this is the film for those of you who said, "There is no *really*
> 	good baseball films."  Takes place in the 50s, a minor league team,
> 	involves baseball, and other things essential to the human condition.
> 
> Legend  -- for those who love fantasy films. This little known Tom Cruise flick 
> 	has excellent special effect/make up/costumes.
> 
> The Hitcher -- Rutger Hauer, C.Thomas Howell, Jennifer Jason Leigh - for those
> 	who are tired of thrillers that are just hack & slash, or
> 	"psychological thrillers" (SWF) with no action.  An intelligent
> 	thriller with something of value on several levels.
> 
> 29th Street -- very Capra-esque.  A warm, funny make you feel good film (with 
> 	out being smarmy, or insulting your intelligence.  Stars Danny Aiello.
> 
> Dogfight -- River Phoenix is a Marine who tries to pick out the ugliest girl to
> 	date.  For those of you who liked Frankie & Johnnie, The Butcher's
> 	Wife, and others like these, this film also offers a romantic comedy,
> 	but it breaks away from a pat formula and remains *very* entertaining.
> 
> Erik the Viking - for fans of The Adventures of Baron von Munchausen - has Tim
> 	Robbins as the brighter than average Viking who tries to save the
> 	world.  Cameos by Terry Jones & John Cleese.  Good spoofy sword &
> 	sorcery stuff, very entertaining.
> 
> 
> 	Well, that'll do for now, I s'pose.  What do think of this list?  Do
> you have any to recommend?  How about if you want to talk about Dogfight,
> rename the post header to that film, so that people can follow that film along,
> and SO WE CAN GET SOMETHING ELSE OUT HERE BESIDES INCONSEQUENTIAL ARGUEMENTS
> REGARDING ALIENS *THIS* AND ALIENS *THAT*! (none of which *really* matters, now
> does it?  perhaps, maybe, a fine diversion/conversation, but not much more. 
> can we now lay that subject to rest, pleeeaaase.)
> 
> walter
>
From: marc@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Marc Goldman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? Nothing!
Date: 3 Sep 92 08:36:36 GMT
Organization: Department of Computing at Lancaster University, UK.

In article <36923@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> jma@reef.cis.ufl.edu (John 'Vlad' Adams) writes:

>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...

I wish people would stop using that 'well it was filmed but it was cut
from the movie' bit to justify thier arguments.

From what i remember reading a Ridley Scott interview was that he cut
the cocooning bits in Alien because he thought it ruined the credibility
of the Alien he was trying to create.

And i believe thie cut cocooning in Alien caused a transformation of the
prisoner as opposed to the cocooning in Aliens, so is not to be assumed
the same.

The bits cut from the second movie are different, they have been
rerealeased here in a directors cut, so i guess you can take them as
part of the story.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      **     **      *  ****** ***    *   |             On the net,
     ** *    **     *** **     ** *   *   |     no-one can hear you scream!
    **   *   **     *** ****   **  *  *   |-------------------------------------
   **     *  **     *** **     **   * *   |  email   marc@comp.lancs.ac.uk
  **       * ******  *  ****** **    **   |      marc@computing.lancaster.ac.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Alien([s]|[\^]([3-9]|[1-9]([0-9])+))?
Date: 28 Aug 1992 19:11:25 GMT
Organization: sio
NNTP-Posting-Host: lutherlab.ucsd.edu
Keywords: regular expression   Alien Aliens Alien^3 Alien^4, etc.


     Is      

            Alien([s]|[\^]([3-9]|[1-9]([0-9])+))? 

     a correct regular expression matching the series of movie titles
     Alien, Aliens, Alien^3, Alien^4.... ?
     Are there shorter regular expressions possible?

     Guess I should post this to sci.comp.

Jeff Bytof
rabjab@golem.ucsd
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: Montague_Kevin @Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Organization: In Effect Enterprises
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:02:52 GMT

In article <2744@nlsun1.oracle.nl>, gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley) writes:

[Snip-ety]

> |>Even if you don't accept that, it is clearly stated in the film that
> the alien
> |>does not draw blood when it captures/kills. In 3, the warder is definitely
> |>bleeding.. I remember because the "mopping up" scene was about the
> only scene I
> |>liked. (I have a very sick sense of humour.)
> |>
> 
>    If you mean stated in "Alien", you are wrong. It is not. 

What he said.

>    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. 

NOT what he said:

> 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.

This may or may not take some faith on your part, but consider that Ripley
is supposed to be Superwoman in this movie.  Fast/strong/brave and Smart.
Very very smart; quick on her feet, intuitive, etc.  So it's not much of
a stretch, actually, to buy her deduction here.  I think you're forgetting
the scene she sees in the monitor, while in the Marine's RV with Gorman and
Burke.  Remember, she sees the woman cocooned and the chestburster come out.
Also recall that the marines went there because the PDT's of the colonists
were clustered in one area. . .clearly the aliens took them there and 
cocooned them for breeding purposes.  Also, reference Ripley's conversation 
with Bishop in medlab: "Each one of these comes from an egg, right?"  So
again, she knows they snatched the colonists to serve as incubators.
Not really a plot hole at all.  Just makes her a formidable woman, as the
rest of the movie supports.
Now, about that hangin onto the ladder in the face of explosive decompression
as Mama tries to yank her off. . .

Kevvy Kev
"The entire world revolves around this wretched Alien."
 -H.R. Giger
From: gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Ridley McIntyre)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Another Aliens Question
Date: 1 Sep 92 08:52:40 GMT
Organization: Ironpig Arcadia, Coventry, UK

In article <1992Sep1.032624.12610@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
>In article <BtvH6D.4A4@agora.rain.com> hopkins@agora.rain.com (Scott Hopk
>ns) writes:
>>	While we're on the subject, why did Ripley bother to torch ad 
>>destroy all the eggs at the end of Aliens, when the planet was going to 
>low
>>up anyway?  Wouldn't it have been more smart to save her ammo, as much a
> she
>>wasted getting there, to try and get out of there alive?  Which she does
>of
>>course in a matter of seconds, as opposed to the minutes it took her to 
>et 
>>there.  Cameron at his best!  :^)
>>			-Casey Hopkins
>>
>
>
>
>The torch and destroy bit, in my opinion, could have two possible
>reasons: 1) so they wouldn't open up and attack her, and 2) (the more
>likely possibility to my mind, considering her current mental state
>) she was working off some aggression.
> 
> /s

And so were we. But I always wondered why she shot a shitload of grenades
into the sacks and torched all the eggs and then just left the alien to 
come after her. Why not blow the shit out of queenie, THEN torch all the
eggs and blow up the sacks...

Oh yes, of course...

It's only a movie. Damn it, I forgot for a second... 8*)


-- 
(c) 1992	 **Ridley McIntyre - Ronin Ironpig**			(c) 1992
		     gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk
		 -----------------------------------
		  "Like your new haircut." - Bishop
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: welter@fwi.uva.nl (Richard Welter)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 19:52:44 GMT

jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes:

>ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:

>>In article <9223901.1740@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes:

>>Brett was bleeding.  Parker was bleeding.  They specifically stated that
>>Dallas did *not* bleed, and we don't know about Lambert.  That's two out
>>of four, with a possible third.

>>I'd say the Alien draws blood.

>*IF* the Alien in the first film draws blood (I didn't see Brett bleed, and
>I've already said why the alien was not following its normal M.O. when it
>iced Parker.) it certainly does not draw it in the lovely gouts we see in the
>third film.

>This is related to the fact that the first 2 films had something called 
>"suspense" which was replaced by buckets of blood in the third.

Well, Alien had suspense which was replaced by bullets, flames and explosions
in the second.
So you like guns and explosions, while I'm more a suspense and gore person :)

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

-- 
*                         X      Computer Science                   /        *
*    Richard J. Welter   |X|  University of Amsterdam           \  /         *
*                         X                                     CIAmiga      *
*      "Marshmallows! Ben, where are those hickory sticks?!"  - Jerry        *
From: gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Ridley McIntyre)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIEN question
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:55:24 GMT
Organization: Ironpig Arcadia, Coventry, UK

In article <1992Aug26.112123.29258@engage.pko.dec.com> boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (Two days and a wake-up...) writes:
>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.
>
>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.

Just a sticky point (I'm feeling sticky now), but O'Bannon was going to
call the ship Leviathan. It was Ridley Scott who renamed everything
after Conrad. I feel better now.

-- 
		 **Ridley McIntyre - Ronin Ironpig**
		     gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk
		 -----------------------------------
		  "Like your new haircut." - Bishop
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:6496 rec.arts.anime:17383
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:56:09 GMT

welter@fwi.uva.nl (Richard Welter) writes:

>jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes:

>>This is related to the fact that the first 2 films had something called 
>>"suspense" which was replaced by buckets of blood in the third.

>Well, Alien had suspense which was replaced by bullets, flames and explosions
>in the second.
>So you like guns and explosions, while I'm more a suspense and gore person :)

Hey! Aliens has suspense - nothing in the third film could compare in terms of
suspense with the marines walking through the empty colony buildings, and
*maybe* there's something around the next corner. (Have you seen the little
scene in the SE where Hudson and Vas pick up some motion? Great stuff.)

Also the prelude to the battle in the reactor was pretty suspenseful IMHO.

The guns, napalm and explosives were like added extras, y'know!

8^)


-- 
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
JJ Glamma                          | "Doctor, I can have an airstrike here in 
aka James William Patrick Bennetts |  minutes."
jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU         | "That won't do any good, Brigadier!"
-----------------------------------+ "No, I didn't think so."
A bird in the hand is messy.	   | 	-- Doctor Who:Battlefield
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
From: v129j6ed@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (This is F.U.N.)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Got IT! ALIENI (4)
Date: 1 Sep 92 16:34:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <7-jnx!_@lynx.unm.edu>, haro@carina.unm.edu (KANEDA) writes...

Not Bad.
You have to let one Alien Queen Egg escape to be part of the ultimate 
horror movie crossover ever, involving Jason Voorhees, Freddy Kruger,
Michael Myers, Vincent Price, EvilToons, Madonna, and the Rambo of the
Gore World himself, ASH. Basically we have the Alien Queen crossing 
timestreams, dropping off Aliens who fight these evil beings. Yes,
Madonna is an evil being.  Before landing in the Middle Ages, Ash
has to fight all of the aliens and the evil menaces.  He disposes
with each one, and leads up to a battle with Alien Queen. She, in
fact, is the Queen who landed in the molten metal and melded with 
the remnants of the T-1000, and creates the Terminating Queen,
who are possessed by the Evil Dead.  In a battle fit for 12 movies,
Ash completely disposes of the Evil Dead Terminating Alien Queen,
and returns to the end of ED II.


*******************************************************************************
"Groovy!" - Ash "Evil Dead II : Dead By Dawn" (1987)
*******************************************************************************
"Fans are interesting things. Rush fans just can't comprehend why the
rest of the world doesn't like Rush. REM fans consider the rest of the world
beneath their social level to notice. Kate Bush fans love the rest of the
world, and the world loves them, but spend long nights plotting to knife
one another."                    --Richard Darwin
                                   Richard Darwin #33, "Gradenza"
*******************************************************************************
v129j6ed@ubvms
The KaTeFan(tm)
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Plot holes in Alien^3 (*S
Date: 2 Sep 92 21:06:26 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

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.

You're absolutely right....

Now, just HOW did those eggs get on the Sulaco?
;-)


-- 
Jorge Diaz                       | Sign in a restaurant:
Georgia Institute of Technology  | 
Office of Information Technology |   "We reserve the right to serve refuse to
ccoprdj@prism.gatech.edu         |        anyone."
From: Montague_Kevin@Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Plot holes in Alien^3 (*S
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:12:00 GMT
Organization: In Effect Enterprises

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?"

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.

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
From: gownder@husc9.harvard.edu (Joseph Gownder)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Stranger in a Strange Land
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:03:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep4.130334.15368
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Sep4.124907.23954@ll.mit.edu> minnear@ll.mit.edu (Bob Minnear) writes:
>
>Does anyone one know if 'Stranger in a Strange Land' is being
>made into a movie.  I seem to remember reading somewhere that
>it was, and Tom Hanks would play Smith, but I can't remember
>now where I saw that...

While I haven't heard about this, I think it would be a _really_ tough
film to make well.  This is one of my favorite novels (and authors), and
I'd hate to see it messed up.

Basically, the movie might be conceived in one of three ways: a "Basic
Instinct" -type sex/attitude movie; a science fiction/effects movie; or
a stripped-down version of the book with superficial treatment of major
Heinlein themes.  It would take three hours or so to even do a decent job
with a _Stranger_ film, IMHO.

I'm waiting for Lucas to do volumes I-III of Star Wars -- I saw the whole
trilogy in one sitting last night (on LDisk), and remembered how much
I really liked those movies.

- J. P. Gownder@husc9.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner)
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:16:56 GMT

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

>From article <u906789.714791167@bruny>, by u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner):
>>   The destruction of the dropship was a  totally unforseen event which
>> normally would probably be highly unlikely

>Yes, that's why they had a second with them.

OK, the destruction of the dropship AND the APC which contained the transmitter is highly unlikely...