HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:41:43 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems

In article <92Aug25.192727.27401@acs.ucalgary.ca> jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes:
>>jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes:
>>
>>> ...it is clearly stated in [Alien] that the alien does not draw blood
>>> when it captures/kills. 
>>
>>Did we see the same movie?  I'm sure this would be news to, among others,
>>Yaphet Kotto's character.
>


According to a particular Cinefex, the Alien actually used its tongue/mouth
to punch a hole into Parkers head, and pull out the brain. If you watch it
reaaal close, and only 1 frame per sec, you can see this.

They used pigs brains in a fake head, and used little velcro hooks on the
mouth to snag the brains. Seems to indicate blood to me.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Death is the Ultimate Victor............            
                                                                      -Tom

Note : I don't care that my location shows .se, I'm in Dallas !!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien hole?: Did the Dropship Forget Bishop?
Date: 28 Aug 92 22:33:53 GMT
Organization: SURAnet, College Park, MD, USA, NA, Earth, Milky Way

In article <rabjab.48.0@golem.ucsd.edu> rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof) writes:
>Another bothering thing:  when the dropship is called in to get the
>team at the APC, WHY WASN'T BISHOP ALONG?  I thought the dropship
>was close enough to operations and medlab that Bishop could have ran
>out and climbed on board before rescuing the "away team".  What was
>Spunkmeyer out doing outside the dropship before he got called in?
>Inspecting the craft for takeoff?  He would have seen the 
>Alien get on board.  No, he was probably getting back after another
>supply run to medlab, which we see him doing once.
>
>The impression I get is that "immediate evac and nuke the site from
>orbit" was to be done in one stroke - there was not one reason to
>remain on the surface of LV-426.  Pickup up the Marines and then
>going back for Bishop would have been silly, considering the chance
>"stirring up the nest" would result in the operations complex being
>overrun again by Aliens.
>
>No, they forgot to pick up Bishop because he was needed to pilot the
>second drop ship after the first one crashed, IMHO.  A plot kludge,
>if I ever saw one.

A couple of possibilities:

1)  Hicks didn't tell Ferro, "We're leaving and nuking this place," he said,
"Prep for dustoff, we need immediate evac."  Perhaps in the parlance of
the Colonial Marines, this means, "Get us the &^*$ out of here!" referring
to where the Marines are.  So Ferro goes off to their rescue without waiting
for Bishop because the Marines could be in big trouble and every second
counts, we'll get him later, etc.  Afterwards, if Hicks tells her to go back
to the Sulaco, then she tells him they need to pick up Bishop first.  Go
from there.

2)  Bishop may be considered expendable, if the Marines are in a real rush.
It's quite likely they considered him nothing more than a machine.  And one
usually does not risk one's life to pick up a machine - unless it's truly
important, but I never got the idea Bishop was irreplacable ("Hell, we're
nuking the whole %^&$ing colony, what's a synthetic, more or less?").

>A detailed analysis of the footage
>of the dropship and its personnel's location and movements may solve
>this seeming dilemma and restore logicality to the plotline.

It doesn't seem like such a plothole to me.  I thought the emphasis at
the time was on getting out of the area, not on taking off and going
back to the Sulaco.
-- 
Bill "Whassamatter?!  Can't you take a joke?!" Barnes   wbarnes@sura.net
Disclaimer:  The author apologizes for any thought-provoking material he may
	     have accidentally included and promises not to do it again.
Datclaimer:  My employers wouldn't WANT to share some of my opinions.
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIEN question
Date: 26 Aug 92 19:31:40 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Aug26.172031.28189@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, by cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows):
> Maybe there was some sort of a point the directors were trying to make,
> some sort of parallel drawn between Richter and the Aliens universe.  Or
> perhaps whoever names the ships is a Conrad Richter fan.

Sorry, but who is Conrad Richter?   No hidden agenda, just curious.  

-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: defon@yoyodine.edu
Subject: Re: Startrek VI - the video
Organization: Allegheny College
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:40:52 GMT

In article <11210002@iftccu.boeing.com> nebres@iftccu.boeing.com (Dan  
Nebres) writes:
> I rented Startrek VI last weekend and saw a changed to a part of the
> movie.  When the Klingon falls from the second floor and dies, the blood
> is red, then a mask is pulled off revealing a human.  Was this edited in
> to the video, because I don't remember this in the movie.
> 


Actually, the video contains about two minutes of previously unreleased  
footage.  Some of the extra scenes:  an extended conference between the  
President of the Federation and other officials;   Scotty's reference to  
the daughter of the deceased Klingon as "the Klingon bitch"; and the  
above-mentioned part at the end of the movie (i.e. - the assassination  
attempt and aftermath).  Sorry if that's vague but I rented it a while ago  
and cannot remember many specifics.

Your guess is as good as mine as to why they bothered with adding only TWO  
MINUTES -- it seems that they should have either just left it alone or  
instead incorporate more unused footage into a special director's cut  
version.

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 01:30:52 GMT

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

>In article <2745@nlsun1.oracle.nl> gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley) writes:

>>    I agree 100% with this. This is a plot hole in Aliens. The only way
>>they could justify leaving no one on the Sulaco during the mission was
>>that the computers on board were smart enough to act as human overseers
>>or backup. And if this were so, a destroyed dropship would mean the
>>marines needed help, drop the second ship on automatic.

>Or not drop it on automatic.  With a human, you'd radio back up and tell
>him to drop the second ship.  If they could communicate with the computer
>to do that, it wouldn't have to be automatic (what if no one survived?
>No point in dropping the ship).

If a computer could fly a dropship then why do they need Ferro & Spunkmyer?

>But there should be *some* way of getting the second ship down.

There was. If the APC had not been destroyed in the dropship crash, then someonewould have remote-piloted the other dropship from the safety of the APC and goneback to the Sulaco and "nuked the place from orbit"(i hope that's a correct     quote). At least that was the plan...

>-- 
>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: exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 1 Sep 92 13:08:39 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems

In article <#zhn9#r@lynx.unm.edu> lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) writes:
>exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek) writes:
>
>>> It's a screw-up, but the history of military and corporate culture is
>>> *full* of similar screw-ups.  It hardly makes the movie less
>>> believable.    
>>
>> Going from the cost estimate, firepower, etc, two techs with parts in a
>> fast shuttle would do the job. The Sulaco looked like a fully equipped
>> battlecruiser with troops. Thats a lot of overkill for a 'possible'
>> downed transmitter, no matter how big the company. 
>
>How do you know?
>
>I'm serious.  How do you know?
>
>At least I'm willing to admit that I'm just speculating; if you have a
>copy of the Colonial Marines General Operations Manual I'd like to
>hear about it.
>

Its right here. US registration # THX-1138, subparagraph A, 'On Proper
Ways to Handle Possible Downed Transmitters in Territory held by Acid-
Blooded Critters.'

Of course I'm speculating, but trying to go from modern and historical
examples. If you have a tech problem, send a tech craft. You don't
waste a big, expensive ship on a small problem.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Death is the Ultimate Victor............            
                                                                      -Tom

Note : I don't care that my location shows .se, I'm in Dallas !!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Aliens, a quick question
Keywords: ALIEN
Date: 26 Aug 92 23:39:01 GMT
Organization: sio
NNTP-Posting-Host: lutherlab.ucsd.edu


>A quick qestion, and I am sorry if it has been asked before, what does an alien
>get out of it's host (beside something to blow out of..) the creature seems to be
>based on the skitis wasp (tranchala hawk) which implants it's egg in a live
>spider, and it's your eat the spider, being careful on to kill the host till they
>emerge...however the alien never seem to do thing...so what is the purpose of a
>host, Warmth?

I think we can postulate (for the sake of future screenwriters in the
alien or other vein) that an organism might be able to infect a host
and incorporate genetic material.  Instead of being a random mutation,
the parasite would have access to a proven (in some sense) genetic
code. Bad things could happen, also.  The mechanism of incorporation
has to be selective.  Somehow, it would have to know what was a good
approach, like having a "genetic simulator", perhaps a special organ
evolved (or designed :->) to perform the function of genetic self-
modification via selective incorporation of host material.  Such an
incorporation would represent an evolutionary advantage, like 
our big brains. Perhaps this organ was what Ash and Bishop were so intently 
peering at in their micro-scanners. 

There seems to be cinematic evidence for the idea of host-dependant 
evolution in Alien^3.

See also my earlier discussion on Alien Cuisine. 
 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:33:57 GMT

merricb@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (The ELF) writes:

>Actually, a lot of this should be blamed on Gorman's inexperience. Really,
>he should have unloaded all necessary stuff from the APC first (including
>the transmitter) before investigating where the colonists were.

I don't think this was a mistake. The transmitter is meant to stay in the APC,
it's the APC's link to SULACO. Besides, where in the colony could it have been
more secure?

The dropship landing on the APC was just dumb luck. I can just imagine a group
of USCMC Top Brass discussing mission requirements for possible transmitter
failure investigations...

"Well, gee I guess we've covered everything."

"No, wait a minute... what if the dropship crashed, and out of four thousand
square miles of available planetary surface, happened to hit the dropship?"

"My God, you're right! That would fuck us right up! Um, put three more dropships
and an entire graduating class of air force cadets on the mothership.... It'll
triple the cost of each mission., but we have to allow for every million-to-one
chance."

"But what if a sqaud encounters an alien race that are immune to bullets but
vulnerable to Cherry-Coca-Cola fired from firehoses?"

"My God, you're right... now if we tear out the backups for the life support,
we might just be able to fit the firehoses in here...."

The mind boggles...

-- 
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien hole?: Did the Dropship Forget Bishop?
Date: 28 Aug 1992 23:13:49 GMT
Organization: sio
NNTP-Posting-Host: lutherlab.ucsd.edu

Bill Barnes opines:

>It doesn't seem like such a plothole to me.  I thought the emphasis at
>the time was on getting out of the area, not on taking off and going
>back to the Sulaco.
>-- 

The question here is did the script as planned and shot really goof on the
question of Bishop, or did they make cuts realizing that having Bishop run 
out of Medlab to get to the landing site of the Dropship #1 would be a 
a dead end sequence.  The original cut of Aliens did not have the remote
sentry sequence, and they cut that out because it was a dead end, I think. 

However, the book seems to interpolate the gap in the direction of 
rushing to leave the planet immediately:

      [Hicks to Bishop via radio:]

      "It doesn't matter. We're getting out. Pack it up and meet us
  on the tarmac.  Can you make it okay?  I don't want to abandon
  the APC until the dropship's on final approach."

      [Bishop:]

      "No problem. It's been quiet back here."

      [Hicks:]

      "Okay. Don't take anything you can't carry easily. Move it."

                                   -Aliens, by A. D. Foster, page 146

   There appears to be real concern for Bishop here, not feelings of
"he's just a machine, leave him and nuke him along with the rest."

   Of course, this is a novelist's interpolation of the script, and
doesn't directly conflict with the movie.

Jeff Bytof
rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu   
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: cjb3701@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Chris Bigenwald)
Subject: Re: Naming Alien 4
Reply-To: cjb3701@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:27:07 GMT

In article <Btq4y4.M7A@wpi.WPI.EDU>, drwho@omar.WPI.EDU (Eric Ant Von Laudermann) writes:
>....[deleted comments]...
>(By the way, didn't someone else post a few months ago, before the
>movie came out, about why they went with "Cubed" instead of "3" ?)
>
So what is the movie called?  "Alien 3" or "Alien cubed"? (still haven't seen
it yet).
From: rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien: The Conrad Connection
Keywords: Conrad Narcissus Nostromo Sulaco
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:56:15 GMT
Reply-To: rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent)
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

In the referenced article, rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof) writes:
>Now we have Nostromo, Sulaco and Narcissus.  Are there any others?
>Should Alien fans rush out to the library and read through stacks 
>of Joseph Conrad novels?  Is there any significance to these namings?

Well, yes, in one sense, they are mostly excellent, though pretty
tough reading. Appropriately enough, most of Conrad's work seems to
explore the dark side of human nature (dual nature of the human beast,
etc.). Most of them contain nautical motifs of various sorts. They are
also some of the most technically well crafted (some say overly
crafted) stories in the English language. And English was the author's
3rd language after Polish and French!! (most or all of his work was
written originally in English, however, because it sold better).

If the above appeals to you (a lot...like I said, Conrad is a really
tough read), by all means check it out.

I seem to remember the name of the protagonist's ship in Lord Jim as
being related to Alien in addition to the name of the title character
in Nostromo, but I could very easily be mistaken...it's been years
since I read either book.

-- 
"When you're down, it's a long way up
 When you're up, it's a long way down
 It's all the same thing
 And it's no new tale to tell"                      ../ray\..
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 28 Aug 92 09:25:57 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <u906789.714969421@bruny>, by u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner):
>>That's the point, the computer couldn't do it, so they should have left a 
>>backup pilot on the Sulaco to fly the second dropship.
 
> This argument seems to be going round and round in circles, but here we go...
> A backup is not needed (except on this occasion)

In any real combat situation, a backup would be even more sorely
needed.

> The destruction of the dropship and the APC
> would seem to be totally unlikely again a bunch of aliens with no weapons...

But they don't know that when they land.  And military regulations are
not based on the assumption that your enemy will have no weapons and
no means of infiltration.
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green)
Subject: PLEASE - No more Alien posts!
Organization: CSIRO ITS
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 01:34:06 GMT

AAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!!!!!

PLEASE - enough with the Alien movies - aren't you guys getting bored shitless
with this topic yet!

Personally I'm starting to get turned off the whole idea of ever watching
any of these movies again.

How about starting a new newsgroup rec.arts.alien.agrovation

-- 
* Steve Green     *  "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outa my hat!"    *
* Comms Group     *  "That trick never works"                            *
* ITS Branch      *  "Nothin' up my sleeve - PRESTO"                     *
* CSIRO Australia *  "No doubt about it - I gotta get another hat"       *
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.starwars
From: darkstar@pecan.cns.udel.edu (The Janitor Of Anarchy)
Subject: Re: Update to Falcon In Tractor Beam
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.starwars
Summary: Let's Try This Out
Keywords: how's this explanation?
Organization: The Green Circle Of Vengence
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 07:40:15 GMT

In article <66981@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt0754b@prism.gatech.EDU (John Richard Deyonke) writes:
>In article <1992Aug27.052344.5840@udel.edu> darkstar@pecan.cns.udel.edu (The Janitor Of Anarchy) writes:
>
[mucho stuff deleted]
>
>Now the $64 question:
>Does Han have the guts to fly around in his line of work with no
>escape pods?       
>
>I'll take a poll.  Responses appreciated.
>
>If Yes then my questions are answered and I feel better.
>I enjoy getting writers off the hook when serious fans think of
>a saving reason for their possible storytelling mistakes. 
>
>If No then we're close but there's still more thinking to do.
>Who agrees with all this so far?
>
>
>Jay
>
>P.S.  An A+ to the Janitor of Anarchy for his response to a question that
>I've had for 14 years.
>
>
>-- 
>John Richard Deyonke
>Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
>uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt0754b
>Internet: gt0754b@prism.gatech.edu

Well, we can't leave you hanging, so here goes.  I do think that Han
has the nerve to fly around without the escape pods.  If not without
all of them, then with all but one.  That way, the "jettisoned several
escape pods" line still holds water.  Now why you ask?  Well, there
really isn't a good reason for Han to keep more than one escape pod at
the most on the Falcon.  I believe this is because first of all, he is
a loner, and since it was stated that the escape pods hold something 
like 6 people, then one is more than enough for him and Chewie.  Also,
in Han's kind of work, if his ship get attacked by pirates or even by
greedy competition, does anyone think that they'll leave survivors.  
Hell, I can see it now. 
	Lacky:  Sir, an escape pod has left the Falcon.
	Sir Nasty:  So soon after disabling her.  Oh what the hell,
	          I don't need messy loose ends.  Turn that pod into
		  Bantha fodder!!!
So, keeping a pod for a quick getaway doesn't do it either.

In fact, the only way I can see Han using an escape pod is if some
thing went wrong and the Falcon malfunctioned (more than usual), and
he had no choice but to abandon ship.  And even then I can see Han
being pig-headed and trying to fix her instead of leaving.  To be
honest, the only way I see Solo getting on board an escape pod is by
having Chewie knock him out cold and dragging him aboard...


I hope this helps...


	--Jerry



-- 

Jerry Alexandratos           | "Choosing a president is like going to
darkstar@freezer.cns.udel.edu|  an adult bookstore...  It's picking 
darkstar@bach.udel.edu       |  the dildo that will hurt the least!!!"
From: talcott@Apple.COM (Adam Talcott)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.starwars
Subject: Re: question + ROTJ FLAME
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:08:11 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

It seems to me that some people are taking "Jedi" and analyzing it outside of
the context of the Star Wars trilogy.  If this were the case, "Empire" would be
a horrible film (aside from the fact that it introduced Boba Fett, it consists
of a number of disjoint events and has no plot whatsoever).

The only film that stands up to any type of analysis outside of this context
is Star Wars (obviously).  The other films have the luxury of already having
their characters and some history developed previously.

Instead of looking at the trilogy as three distinct movies, I tend to look
at them as a whole.  "Star Wars" is the exciting opening that pulls you into
the universe and introduces its characters.  "Empire" is the (relative) lull in
the middle that develops the characters, gives them more depth and adds to their
history with relatively minor adventures.  Finally, "Jedi" wraps up all of the
loose ends and brings the story to a conclusion.

IMHO, if the films are examined in any other way, "Star Wars" is the only film
that I would call good (well, I would call it magnificent!)
-- 
Adam R. Talcott         | "I'm a scientist!  I don't think, I observe!"
talcott@apple.com       |    -- Dr. Clayton Forrester
talcott@grape.ucsb.edu  |       "Hercules Against the Moon Men"
                        |	Mystery Science Theater 3000