HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: oscar@Lise.Unit.NO (Rune Aasgaard)
Subject: Are *YOU* Human?
Keywords: Bladerunner, Philip K. Dick, Replicants
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 19:26:43 GMT


Question : Was Deckard a replicant or not?

In spite of recent articles on rec.arts.sf.movies on this subject the
question still remains unanswered.

Personally, I had never even considered that Deckard might be a replicant.
To me, the idea of the movie was this : What *is* a human being? What's the
*definition* of being human?

Philip K. Dick, author of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" - on which the
movie Bladerunner is based - had this as one of his main themes. One of his
best short-stories in this respect is "Human Is" to be found in "Volume Two
of the collected short-stories of Philip K. Dick : Second Variety".

It has, admittedly, been some time since I last saw the movie or read the,
but in neither did I get the impression that Deckard was a replicant. Of
course, if he was he wouldn't know due to his implanted memory, but I still
don't think he was. Oh, it would be a very Dick'ian thing to do, but the
way the replicants are treated and described in the book gives me the idea
that this isn't so.

In any case, we have no *proof*, only circumstancial evidence. We can only
speculate. Thus, even though this discussion is slightly interesting it is 
also quite futile.

In my opinion, the point isn't whether Deckard was a replicant or not! It
doesn't matter one single bit! The question is this : 

                            What makes us human?

What are the replicants? They aren't Terminators, T1000's or any such thing!
They are merely extremely advanced test tube babies, genetically engineered and
designed, with human DNA as the building piece. They are human in every sense,
except that they were conceived in a dish and born in a tank. They are freaks,
they have close to perfect genes, and we "normal" and "not-so-perfect" humans
hate them for it! Let's kill the bastards!

In addition to Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Elctric Sheep" I also recommend
Robert A. Heinlein's "Friday". The latter is so-so story wise, but what
Friday is intrigues me. She's a creche baby, designed and born in a lab. Her
genes are perfect and people hate her for it. But she is still *human*.

I also recommend other Philip K. Dick short-stories/novels. A lot of it is
weird, but it makes you *think*!

Feel free to comment either way on any of this. Flames particularly welcome :)

Rune

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|     Rune Aasgaard      | " Can't you see?                                   |
|   oscar@lise.unit.no   |   It all makes perfect sense                       |
|------------------------|   Expressed in dollars and cents                   |
|    Computer Science    |   Pounds, shillings and pence     "                |
| Norwegian Institute of |                                                    |
|       Technology       |                - Roger Waters , Amused to Death -  |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: rjk@world.std.com (robert j kolker)
Subject: Re: The Day the Earth Stood Still
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:03:16 GMT

Right on!. The political message at the end of TDTESS is pure libertarian
limited government philosphy. That is to say Government is a policeman,
not a welfare agency or a charity. I consider TDTESS to be one of the best
put together SCI-FI movies.  

It also is much better than the short novel by Harry Bates on which it was
loosely based.

Bob Kolker



Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: djs@doc.ic.ac.uk (Daniel James Slattery)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Yep, it's another Blade Runner post
Keywords: Blade Runner, soundtrack
Date: 19 Nov 92 10:40:20 GMT
Organization: Department of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
NNTP-Posting-Host: oak8.doc.ic.ac.uk


"Blade Runner:the Director's Cut" is due to open here in London on Friday 27th
(it is being shown as the final film in the London Film Festival this Sunday
- SOLD OUT sorry). What I would like to know is who did the music? Did they
keep Vangelis' score or did Tangerine Dream rework it as memtioned in this 
post earlier this year?
Is the soundtrack available this time around? I would hope so because
Vangelis held back his music, due to the fact that he didn't like the 
original version of the film either. Now the director's version has arrived,
will he release it? (Mind you for every album he releases there's at least one
soundtrack that doesn't make it onto vinyl/tape/CD. Has anyone seen the
soundtrack for "Bitter Moon" anywhere? (:-)) )
Finally, I heard that AS WELL as the director's cut, Ridley Scott was shooting
new footage for what would be a complete "reworking" (or "remix" if you like)
of "Blade Runner", due for release next year. Anyone know any more? (I assume
that "Blade Runner II", supposedly starring Arnie till Ridley walked off set,
is as dead as...something that's dead ;-)) )

I await your answers with great anticipation. Mail me if you like or
I'll just wait for you to post them. 

(damn - I can't fit my .sig on!!)
Dan the Man and his Ice Cream Van (make mine a 99!)
Email : djs@doc.ic.ac.uk
Phone : 071-387 1477 extension 231 (ask for room 906)
        (+ 44 71 387 1477 outside UK)
From: adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: sound in space
Date: 19 Nov 92 14:50:34 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computing & Electrical Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <1992Nov17.004954.13497@ll.mit.edu> shoham@ll.mit.edu (Daniel Shoham) writes:
>
>There is also - aptly named - "Silent Run".

"Silent Running".

>Moonrakers (sp?), the James Bond foray into SF ...

"Moonraker" - only one.  (At least, only one important enough to feature in
the title.)

>There are a *lot* of false effects, beside sounds in space, regularly used in
>otherwise realistic SF films: "LASER" beams that the viewer can see - in
>transit, and all those human-looking alien species, etc.

How many alien species have you seen, anyway?  Maybe they do all look like
humans. :-)

I have also seen a science fact film with sounds in space.  The program
dealt with the Solar System, and had some very nice graphics showing how
the System was formed.  It also showed how planets and satellites got
craters, by being bombarded with meteors.  The meteor bombardment came
complete with artillery sound effects, even though it was being viewed
from space rather than from the planet's or satellite's surface.

As for "Alien", "In space, no-one can hear you scream" - above the sound of
the engines. :-)

-- 
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cee
 UUCP: ..!uknet!cee.hw.ac.uk!adrian  |  ARPA:  adrian@cee.hw.ac.uk
From: dejesus@avalon.nwc.navy.mil (Francisco X DeJesus)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Computers in films/TV -** THE LIST **-
Date: 19 Nov 92 02:34:54 GMT
Organization: Science Applications International Corp.

In article <1992Nov17.051305.16166@ucc.su.OZ.AU> horne@physics.su.OZ.AU (Geoff Horne) writes:
>Here's The List -----------
>
>COMPUTERS --
>Movies:

>W.O.P.R		- War Games

It was called the "WOPR", but didn't they address is simply as "joshua"? 
IMHO, that would make a better name for a Unix box than "WOPR" (which always
leads people to the question "where's the Big Mac?" :-> ).

-- 
Francisco X DeJesus  ----- S A I C -----  dejesus@archimedes.chinalake.navy.mil
disclaimer: "Opinions expressed here are mine. Typos and errors are all yours."
From: u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien biology
Date: 16 Nov 92 04:51:54 GMT
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.

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

>In article <1992Nov11.212230.5626@tandem.com> Montague_Kevin@Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev) writes:
>>Shorthand for visible light.  Another obligatory slam at A3, in which our
>>"perfect" killing machine relies on the same perceptual tools we astigmatic 
>>humans use.  Ugh.
What's wrong with aliens seeing? I don't get it...

>Ah.  Colors of the spectrum.  Got it.  Hmm, yes, again, no way to get around
>that bad writing.  OK, so the Aliens don't have eyes.  How do they see?  Or,
>how do they sense what's around them?

>>And why didn't the colony pick
>>up on the warning beacon from the derelict, either before, or during their 
>>occupancy of Acheron?

It stopped working. The ship had been disturbed sometime after _Alien_.

mark.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca (Tom Hamill)
Subject: Re: XTRO ***SPOILERS*** (was Re: Movie sorta like Aliens name ???)
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.movies
Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 00:04:11 GMT

In article twyse@acpub.duke.edu (Timothy Wyse) writes:
>
>  I read the summary of XTRO II, and, well, did we see the same movie?
>Maybe there's more than just two, because I remember a much different plot.
>
    [deleted _accurate_ description of XTRO II]

My apologies, you are correct.  I go thru periods where I'll rent
nothing but 'cheesy sci-fi', and XTRO II is a prime example of what 
I mean.  As to the movie I described as XTRO II, I think now that it may
have been called "Dead Space" but I can't be sure, although it is also
another example of 'cheesy sci-fi'[1].  This is bugging me so much
that when I go out later tonight I'm going to stop in the video store
and make sure that I got it right this time.

>The movie was so bad I never bothered to see the original. It was SO much 
>of an Aliens ripoff, complete with a squad of government chumps with heavy 
>weapons who were "sure" they could deal with the situation and ignored 
>advice from the only person who had any experience with the problem. 
>
You're right about XTRO II being an Aliens ripoff, but XTRO really is
a completely different movie from the second one.  It leans more
towards horror than SF, and the surprising quality of the special
effects makes it worth seeing by anyone who likes to be 'terrified' by
alien-creatures.

>Can anyone straighten things out on what movie is what?
>
I hope I got it right this time.

[1]  Further examples of 'cheesy sci-fi':

"Slipstream"      starring Mark Hamill
"Moontrap"        starring Walter Koenig(sp?)
"Class of 1999"   starring ?????
"Horror Planet    ditto
"The Borrower"    ditto
"Star Knight"     ditto
"Death Race 2000" Starring David Carradine
 
---tom

l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l
l      CRUSH---CompassionRespectUnderstandingSelfHonesty---CRUSH      l
l         How could you have ever lived your life without it?         l
l               Join Now, Apply Within.  Spread the word.             l
l____________________________      ---me, trying to save the world,   l
l wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca l                      from itself.       l
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.sf.written
From: bankler@terrier.ece.cmu.edu (Brian Bankler)
Subject: Re: Are *YOU* Human?
Keywords: Bladerunner, Philip K. Dick, Replicants
Organization: Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 14:03:28 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.192643.8619@ugle.unit.no> oscar@Lise.Unit.NO (Rune Aasgaard) writes:
>[stuff deleted]
>In addition to Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Elctric Sheep" I also recommend
>Robert A. Heinlein's "Friday". The latter is so-so story wise, but what
>Friday is intrigues me. She's a creche baby, designed and born in a lab. Her
>genes are perfect and people hate her for it. But she is still *human*.
>
>I also recommend other Philip K. Dick short-stories/novels. A lot of it is
>weird, but it makes you *think*!

	Also along the same theme, but a much better short story, is the
story Beggars in Spain, which won quite a few awards and appears in the
Years Best Science Fiction.  It's about people who are only mildly
engineered, and everyone still hates them.

>Feel free to comment either way on any of this. Flames particularly welcome :)
>
>Rune
>
>-- 
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>|     Rune Aasgaard      | " Can't you see?                                   |
>|   oscar@lise.unit.no   |   It all makes perfect sense                       |
>|------------------------|   Expressed in dollars and cents                   |
>|    Computer Science    |   Pounds, shillings and pence     "                |
>| Norwegian Institute of |                                                    |
>|       Technology       |                - Roger Waters , Amused to Death -  |
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: muhlig@usctoux1.cto.us.edu.pl (Maciek Uhlig)
Subject: computer technology in sf movie production
Organization: Computer Center, Silesian University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:41:58 GMT

I'm interested in computer technology in sf movie production (special
effects, computer graphics, sounds etc.). Could some kind soul
tell me where can I find some info on the net?

Maciek

muhlig@usctoux1.cto.us.edu.pl [155.158.2.8]
Maciek Uhlig, Computer Center, Silesian University, Katowice, Poland
====================================================================
        "Imagine all the people sharing all the world" - John Lennon
From: terry@edsi.plexus.COM (Terry Dawson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Dracula (No Spoilers)
Date: 18 Nov 92 07:22:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: edsi.1992Nov18.072224.26771
Organization: Appleton Public Library - Appleton, WI

jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes:

>In article <4wNcuB1w165w@memalph.UUCP> system@memalph.UUCP (Woody  
>Harper) writes:
>> I just saw Dracula on Sunday (the latest version) and I was sorely 
>> disappointed. Mr. Copola told myself and about 2000 others at the  
>San 
>> Diego Comic Convention that this would be an accurate adaption of  
>the 
>> original novel. I read the novel the day before I saw the movie and  
>I 
>> must say that Mr. Copola LIES! There are so many significant  
>deviations 
>> that it is unfair for the two to share a title. When more folks  
>have seen 
>> the flick we can discuss these differences. Also, the movie looked  
>cheap. 
>> It lacked production value and had the appearance of a  
>"made-for-tv" 
>> movie. I was very excited going into this show and very  
>diasappointed 
>> coming out.
>> 

>Are you sure you saw the correct movie?  Whatever its faults
>(and I think Dracula had several), its production values were
>incredible.  The movie is worth watching for its lavish
>sets, lighting, costumes, etc.
Well, I suppose Woody Harper has a right to be disappointed if he
wishes, but I agree with Jim Mann: the production values were VERY high.
And though I would not call it a completely faithful adapation of the
novel, it is quite close in many respects; perhaps closer than any other
screen version.

-- 
     Terry Dawson       | "Only connect!" | voice: (414) 832-6168
Appleton Public Library |                 |   fax: (414) 832-6422
  Appleton, WI 54911    |  -E.M. Forster  | terry@edsi.plexus.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: Montague_Kevin@Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev)
Subject: Re: Alien biology
Organization: In Effect Enterprises
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:26:15 GMT

In article <nigel.722048522@saturn>, nigel@socs.uts.edu.au (Nigel Pearson) writes:
> 
> In <1992Nov11.212230.5626@tandem.com> Montague_Kevin@Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev) writes:
> >NOW:
> >What was that blue film over the eggs in the first movie?  What happened to
> >the alien that gestated inside of the pilot?  And why didn't the colony pick
> >up on the warning beacon from the derelict, either before, or during their 
> >occupancy of Acheron?
> 
> 	Didn't Dallas turn it OFF when they found it in the derelict ship?

No.  In fact, it's still functioning in A2; this is how the colonists locate
the ship.

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: franzis@evax.gdc.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: 2001 : What does it mean!!!
Date: 20 Nov 92 18:22:46 GMT
Organization: General DataComm, Middlebury CT


 Hello,

	Last night I saw 2001 A space odyssey for the 10th time

  and I still don't understand the last part. (When his space pod

  is flying through the crazy colors to the end where the monolith

  appears again) Am I suppose to understand it? Does the author

  understand it !!??  If someone could enlighten me I would appreciate

  it. Please no jokes and no references to the second movie 2010.


				Pat.



Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl (Phil Isherwood)
Subject: T3
Reply-To: pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl
Organization: ESA/Estec/WMS, Noordwijk, The Netherlands
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 10:45:42 GMT

Apologies for my last post on this subject, my news server was
mis-behaving. The post should have read:

I had heard from a friend of a friend that James Cameron has
employed a small group of UK graphics experts to work on
developing new and improved graphics effects for possible use
in another Terminator movie. The guy said that the T3 movie
would only be made IF (and only if) more ijnpressive graphics
are developed. The feeling is that T3 will have to be even
more technically impressive than T2, or Cameron won't even
consider making it.

Well, that's what I heard. As to the validity of the above
statement, who can say ?

Phil Isherwood
pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl
 



Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us (Dan Hartung)
Subject: Re: Deckard WAS a replicant!
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 06:43:38 GMT

marvil@lysator.liu.se (Martin Vilcans) writes:
>adam@sw.stratus.com (Mark Adam) writes:
>
>>five: with most of the replicants you see their eyes glowing at one point or
>>another. even the owl's eyes glowed. this never happened with the humans. there is
>>one scene where deckard is behind rachel and both of the are facing the camera...
>>lo and behold BOTH of their eyes are glowing.
>
>>of all the 'deckard is a replicant' clues this is the slap in the face.
>
>Yes, that's the one I though was the most obvious "proof" that Deckard was a
>replicant. And when the female replicant asked him if he had made the
>whatever-its-called test on himself.

C'mon.  Perhaps the question was intended to point out that the replicant-
identification test is INADEQUATE for distinguishing humans and replicants,
and that if Deckard were to fail this test, he might then have a VERY
GOOD reason to doubt that he should continue to kill them.

-- 
"I wouldn't want to ruin such a        | Dan Hartung               |  Ask me
lovely recession...er, reception."     | dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us |  about
    -- George Bush                     | Birch Grove Software      | Rotaract!
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: lma@dayton.Stanford.EDU (Larry Augustin)
Subject: List of all the Planet of the Apes movies?
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: 17 Nov 92 05:38:13 GMT

Several of the Planet of the Apes movies have been showing up on TV
here recently (also the series on the SciFi channel).  Could someone
post a list of the movies, along with a one-line description?  Here's
what I recall:

1. Planet of the Apes - Astronaut Taylor (Charlton Heston) crashes on
   Earth in the far future, only to discover that we nuked ourselves
   back to the stone age and Apes have taken over.

2. Beneath the Planet of the Apes - James Franciscus (??) follows in
   Charlton Heston's footsteps, and discovers a group of humans living
   underground that worship an atomic bomb.

3. ?? (Journey to the Planet of the Apes??)  - I couldn't find anyone
   who remembered this one, and I've not seen it.  Somehow we get
   around the ending of (2), and 2 talking apes return to present day
   Earth.

4. Conquest of the Planet of the Apes - I
   think this one is where the supposedly dead child (Ceasar) of the
   talking apes in (3) starts the first rebellion against man.

5. Battle for the Planet of the Apes - No idea.

Thanks,

Larry

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jfarrell@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (James Farrell)
Subject: Re: sound in space
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:53:00 GMT

In article <1eoqsrINN8af@gap.caltech.edu> keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>>>Well, where in Star Wars was there "sound in space"?  If you mean the space
>>>battles, then I'm sure that the pilots of each ship would hear those
>>>swooping noises...  (hear it of their own ship that is).  I though that
>>>those noises were due to the engine, etc.
>>>
>>>If you mean the explosion of the Death Star, then sure you'd hear that.
>>>I mean, such an explosion surely releases a shock wave of matter... you'd
>>>hear it all right, when the shock wave reached you.  Or, if you mean
>>>the destruction of Alderaan... same principle.  Surely the people in the
>>>Death Star heard it, not to mention the people on the planet itself
>>>(of course, they all died right away)...
>
>>Sorry Keith,
>
>>Sound waves do not travel in space. Sound waves can't travel through a
>>vacuum. Therefore, no matter how great the explosion, the sound waves
>>will not be heard.
>
>Come on, you're not thinking here.  When something massive exploads, it
>is going to spew off quite a bit of matter.  This matter will form shock
>waves which will impact anything in its path.  These shock waves will cause
>a ship, for example, to vibrate.  These vibrations can be felt, and if there
>is air inside the ship (such as in the X-Wings and the Falcon), the waves
>will be heard as well.  You see, it is not actually sound travelling through
>a vacuum, but matter that causes a sound that is moving.  Get it?
>
>keith
>
Agreed. You will hear the sound of matter striking the ship, but this
won't be the sound of the explosion. Take the detonation of a land mine,
for example. The sound of the explosion will be quite different that the
sound of the rock and other debris striking the ground. I was only
trying to make the point that the actual detonation of the planet/death
star wouldn't travel in space. (but it is fun to discuss)
From: imcc@cs.strath.ac.uk (Iain McCord)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Deckard WAS a replica
Date: 23 Nov 92 17:35:25 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. Dept., Strathclyde Univ., Scotland.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

John Caruso (caruso@socrates.umd.edu) wrote:
: In article <6133@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> Markus Stumptner writes:
: memories.  None of these "other explanations" you're invoking has ever
: accounted for this in a satisfactory way.

  How about....
Deckard talks in his sleep,  when he had the unicorn dream he mumbled something
about it.  Gaaf had his room bugged.
Deckard, and all other blade runners, do take the empath test.  They also take
other psyche tests as well.  ( part of Freudian and other analysis training is
undergoing analysis. )  His results are on record.  One of these tests involved
Roschat (sp) blobs.  Deckards description of a phalic shape was as a unicorn,
and of other sexual imagery similar fantasy elements.  The unicorn was a 
reference to Gaafs having read Deckard's file.

: 
: - John
-- 

		~~~~~/\~~~~~
Iain McCord	~~~~/()\~~~~	Mon Nov 23 17:35:23 WET 1992
		~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies