HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Naming Alien 4
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:41:14 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <BtK728.Epy@wpi.WPI.EDU> drwho@wpi.WPI.EDU (Eric Ant Von Laudermann) writes:
>As a math major, I particularly noticed that although the movie
>was called ALIEN^3, most people called it ALIEN 3.  Not just out of
>convenience, mind you: they simply didn't get it.

Well, I'm not a math major, but I do know a liiiitle about math.
While the poster certainly showed it as ALIEN^3, underneath it said
something like:


                   Three times the danger

                   Three times the suspense

                   Three times the <somethingelse>.

So while the heading *said* "Alien cubed", them certainly *meant*
"Alien three" and just thought it would be a funky way to write it.

Please don't insult us and assume that we "just didn't get it".

>ALIEN!
>("alien factorial")

Now here's one that most people would not get.

>or...
>ALIENTH
>(1/alien)
>Yes? No? Maybe?

No.


-- 
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."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: haro@carina.unm.edu (KANEDA)
Subject: Re: Aliens 4 plot
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 04:37:58 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque


Could ahve sorn I read this in a comic by Dark Horse???

HUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM...


R.K.F.


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,alt.cult-movies
From: dave@blackbox.cc.columbia.edu (David Milner)
Subject: GODZILLA NEWS
Keywords: Godzilla Mothra Batora Japanese Monster
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 03:50:08 GMT

12,000 years ago, Mothra fought Batora at the North Pole. Mothra won,
and Batora was trapped in an iceberg.

A Japanese archeologist goes to Infant Island, and there he discovers
not only two tiny girls, but also a huge egg. He publishes his findings
in Japan.

The head of a major Japanese corporation decides to bring the egg to
Japan and exploit it. A ship is sent to retrieve it.

Batora breaks free somewhere in Siberia, and heads for Japan. He passes
through Nagoya, destroying everything in his path. Eventually, he 
crawls into the Pacific Ocean.

Godzilla, coming from the Ogasawara Sea, meets up with the ship bringing
the egg from Infant Island to Japan. Batora also appears. The ship is 
destroyed, and Mothra hatches.

The three monsters battle each other. Mothra eventually returns to
Infant Island, while Godzilla and Batora continue fighting at the bottom
of the ocean.

That's all Toho is letting out about the plot so far, but here is 
more information on the film:

Godzilla, Mothra and Batora again fight each other. This time, the
battle is in Tokyo, and both Mothra and Batora are in their adult stages.

Mothra now has a "super sound wave" beam.

Batora has a "prism" ray that he emits from his horn.

Shooting will wrap on Sept. 1st.




David Milner  Columbia University
inet:   dave@blackbox.cc.columbia.edu
usenet: ...rutgers!columbia!blackbox!dave
        ...rutgers!columbia!blackbox.cc.columbia.edu!dave
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 27 Aug 92 12:29:42 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <92Aug26.162336.30823@acs.ucalgary.ca> jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes:

>I think the line 'The transmitter was on the APC!' pretty much
>serves that purpose.

>I think you just missed that line (I think its Hudson saying it,
>methinks in the following dialogue, paraphrased from memory...)

Hmmm, you know what?  You're absolutely right.  My bad.

Forget I ever brought it up. :-)


-- 
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."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green)
Subject: AKIRA - Great flick! - But what's it about ?
Organization: CSIRO ITS
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 23:50:23 GMT

I just saw AKIRA over the weekend, on video even. It's a total knockout.
But I was left wondering what the hell it was all about. This is NOT
a criticism on the film, some of the best Sci-Fi movies I have ever seen
leave you feeling the same way ( 2001, Quiet Earth just to name two )

Did anyone else feel this too - or did I watch it too late at night. Also,
I did have a little trouble identifying the central characters at the start
of the movie. Kaneda and Tetsuo (sp?) especially. After about fifteen minutes
I was OK.

I WILL definately hire it again soon. What a movie !

-- 
* 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"       *
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 27 Aug 92 08:56:44 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <u906789.714878216@bruny>, by u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner):
> OK, the destruction of the dropship AND the APC which contained the transmitter is highly unlikely...

Why?  It seems this was quite easy, and against a low-tech opponent.
OK, the fact that the dropship hit exactly the APC in all the city is
of very low probability.  Another plot device.  But the APC did not
appear all that indestructible.

-- 
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: minnear@ll.mit.edu (Bob Minnear)
Subject: Stranger in a Strange Land
Originator: minnear@ll.mit.edu (Bob Minnear)
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington MA
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 12:49:07 GMT


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...


Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:6491 rec.arts.movies:25555
From: slb3y@cc.usu.edu (Punk Rocketeer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Script Query: _The_Princess_Bride_
Date: 23 Aug 92 17:03:47 MDT
Organization: United Order of Non-joiners

ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Aaron Wigley [Wigs]) writes:
> I'm looking for the correct dialogue spoken between Westley and Inigo
> during the swordfight in the ruins. What I have so far is:

     Included.  Do note that I've changed your dialog listings
slightly.  They weren't correct.  And what I've typed in is from
hearing.  I'm not sure of the spelling.

> Inigo: 		You seem a decent fellow. I hate to kill you.
> Dread Pirate Roberts: 	
> 		You seem a decent fellow. I hate to die.
> Inigo: 		Begin. 
> 		You are using Bonetti's defense against me, eh?
> Dread Pirate Roberts: 	
> 		I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.
> Inigo: 		Naturally, you must expect me to attack with
Capofeiro.   
> Dread Pirate Roberts: 
> 		Naturally, but I find that Tybalt cancels out
Capofeiro.
> Inigo: 		Unless the enemy has'a studied his Agrippa!
Which I have.                       [this one I'm not too sure of]
> 		You are wonderful!
> Dread Pirate Roberts: 	
> 		Thank you. I've worked hard to become so.
-- 
Patrick S. Clark | "Well!  Peanut butter! . . . or so it seems."
Email is life!   | --Calvin 
Utah State University doesn't care what I put here . . . I hope.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: smintz@sedona.intel.com (Stephen Mintz exp 11/92~)
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Originator: smintz@alamo
Organization: Intel Corporation
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 23:27:21 GMT


> > So what if there is a backup pilot on SULAO, who is paid to sit in the dropship
> > bay smoking cigarettes, and he gets appendicitis at the wrong time. 
> 
> See?  Still better than ignoring the possibility completely.  
> 
> > You see my point, I hope. Backups cost money and resources, and ninety-nine
> > times out of a hundred, they need never be used.
> 
> Yes.  And still they are included.  Everywhere around you.  And in the
> military, especially.  Have you ever wondered why the US Navy uses so
> many twin-engined aircraft?  Heavier, larger, more difficult to
> maintain?  Because ejecting over the sea is not pleasant, though still
> less so than sitting on a planet, with your only means of escape being
> a beautiful ship sitting incommunicado hundreds of kilometers above
> you.  A single man (or two) are very cheap as backups go.
> 
> > Someone in Colonial Marine ops
> > decided that a seperated dropship and APC, with a qualified pilot kept away
> > from both vehicles (Bishop) was enough redundancy.
> 
> I keep trying to just see that one thinking about whether he should
> send 12 or thirteen marines (or 15/16, or whatever), but I can't.  The
> point is that such a safety margin usually is included in such a
> mission by default.  Nobody wastes any time on cutting that kind of
> support.
> 
> (Btw, the separated pilot does not matter, since he's no use without the
> dropship and he's not needed to use the transmitter in the APC.)
> 
> > Now, maybe he made a mistake, and there should have been more redundancy... but
> > it seems a credible enough decision to me.
> 
> No. :-)
> -- 
> 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
I am not argueing with the point of this post (I agree with it) however the navy
likes twin engined aircraft because they give more thrust for take off, off of
aircraft carriers, due to short runways. sorry for interupting, continue with the
arguement...:)
Stephen
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 28 Aug 92 09:21:44 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <u906789.714969215@bruny>, by u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner):
> It *wasn't* "enemy territory". 

OK, it was friendly territory that had been occupied violently under
significant loss of life.

> Also people do make mistakes; things
> go wrong; noones perfect...

True.  But this can be overdone, and was done in this case.

-- 
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: smintz@sedona.intel.com (Stephen Mintz exp 11/92~)
Subject: Aliens, a quick question
Originator: smintz@alamo
Keywords: ALIEN
Organization: Intel Corporation
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:56:27 GMT


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?
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Aliens ^3: Should I Watch It?
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:04:52 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)

In article <1992Aug25.141336.13746@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>,
cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
|>
|>I've heard a lot about Aliens^3, from both sides.  I haven't seen it
|>yet, but I _have_ read the novelization (and didn't like it very much,
|>for many of the same reasons stated by John Carson in his posts).  Now,
|>Aliens^3 is currently showing in the dollar theatres here in town (the
|>second-run theatres which only charge $1 admission).         
|>
|>I want a consensus on whether or not I should watch it.  Is it worth $1,
|>plus bus costs?  Or should I just wait for it to come out on video or TV?
|>
|>---Chris Meadows
           
   I'd say "yes" for a dollar. The plot may be crappola, but it is great
visually and the effects are nice. The Alien effects in particular are
better than the in the 2 previous films. Let me put it this way...it is
WAY BETTER than Batman Returns.

+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Gary Bradley        |   "You receive a love letter from me and |
| ORACLE Corp, UK     |                  you're f*cked forever!" |
| Edinburgh, SCOTLAND |        - Frank Booth ("Blue Velvet")     |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| "God damn the censor man"                                      |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
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 01:37:23 GMT

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

>In article <u906789.714791167@bruny> u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner) writes:

>>Everything that possibly could go wrong, did go wrong(and then some).
>>If the dropship is damaged/destroyed normally someone remote-pilots the
>>2nd one. But the transmitter was also destroyed preventing this from being
>>done.

>I see.  What about about on a planet where the remote unit was destroyed
>before the marines got there?  Or there wasn't one in the first place?
>Or it just hasn't come on-line yet?

I mean the transmitter on the APC which was destroyed in the dropship crash.

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: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:37:01 GMT

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

>u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner) writes:

>>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?

>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) because the 2nd dropship can
be remote-piloted from the APC. The destruction of the dropship and the APC
would seem to be totally unlikely again a bunch of aliens with no weapons...

>>>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 
>>someone would have remote-piloted the other dropship from the safety of the 
>>APC and gone back to the Sulaco and "nuked the place from orbit"(i hope that's a 
>>correct quote). At least that was the plan...

>Ok, let's make that, there should be some *secure* way of getting the second 
>ship down.

>Richard.

>>>-- 
>>>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."

>-- 
>*                         X      Computer Science                   /        *
>*    Richard J. Welter   |X|  University of Amsterdam           \  /         *
>*                         X                                     CIAmiga      *
>*      "Marshmallows! Ben, where are those hickory sticks?!"  - Jerry        *
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: Philip.Banks@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Philip Richard Banks)
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 04:48:02 GMT

In article <66905@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:
>
>Why do you make this assumption?

   He makes it because they state specifically in the film that the uplink in
the APC was wasted so they had no way to bring the second dropship down. Then
they hit on the idea of using the colonies uplink tower.

>The APC was not destroyed (at least, not until the whole thing blew up).
>
>Which implies that the APC does not have a link to the Sulaco (or else
>they would have used it).  Which implies that the only way to get the
>second dropship down is to use a land-based signal that may (or may not)
>exist on the planet they are on.
>
>Sounds pretty iffy.

   Bzzzt. Wrong. The APC was sufficiently destroyed to make only four remote 
guns, some grenades, and pulse rifles salavagble. Communications equipment is
reasonably delicate so it is quite reasonable that it was destroyed. (Oh and
two flame throwers as well were salvaged.)

   Remember they were going into a situation where they didn't expect *any*
trouble. They had the APC and the dropship safely seperated and the dropship
was 'safe' in what was deemed a secure area. I have no problems with a fast
response team like this one was taking everybody down to investigate what they
thought was merely a downed transmitter.

Philip
-- 
 Philip R. Banks  pbanks@comp.vuw.ac.nz (An Arc owner with a mission)  @@@@@/|
    (Quite what mission I am not too sure yet. But I do have one!)     @@@@/#|
 "There may be an om in moment,but there's very few folk in focus!"    @@@/--|
	--'Hallowed be thy Name' by Emerson,Lake & Palmer.             @@/###|
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: singley@helix.nih.gov (Erick D. Singley)
Subject: Re: Alien^3? Loved it.
Organization: (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD)
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 13:13:33 GMT

>>In article <5401@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) 
>>writes:

>>       And I guess people miss the point of MOVIE. A movie IS NOT REALITY.

>A very true statement. 

>So it always amazes me why people spend hours and hours writing long
>messages picking holes in something which is pure fantasy.

Ah, but should a movie not mirror reality and show it from a perspective to
give new insight on what we might not see from the inside?
If we went to see a completly non-sequitor film that dealt with the the daily
life of a working joe- with nothing else happening- one would say "what's the
point? I can get pointless stories from any drunk guy at a party"  People want
to find meaning within activities.  What is being bantered here is the point
to Aliens- or even a 'label' (horror/suspense/drama/action?)
If a movie can't be plausible (sure I might believe in a Warp drive- but to
have this guy going into a dark basement where the howling noises are without
getting help/a gun/ a light is ludricous) then we have problems with the movie
itself.

Erick

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: craig@odie.cs.mun.ca (Craig Coffin)
Subject: Re: Naming Alien 4
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 20:15:52 GMT

>> As a math major, I particularly noticed that although the movie
>> was called ALIEN^3, most people called it ALIEN 3.  Not just out of
>> convenience, mind you: they simply didn't get it (although most
>> newspapers and entertainment magazines did.)  In keeping with
>> this, how about:
>> 
>> ALIEN!
>> ("alien factorial")
>> 
>> or...
>> ALIENTH
>> (1/alien)
>
>what about   dAlien/dX

Or maybe:      a
             \~~~  i + e
              >   L
             /___
              n=4

   ...or is this taking things too far out of hand?  :-)

-- 

Craig Coffin          |  "Try not.  Do, or do not.  There is no try."
craig@odie.cs.mun.ca  |       -- Yoda, TESB

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
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: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 04:06:25 GMT

lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) 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.

When the Alien kills Parker, it is not interested in him. It is interested in
Lambert. Parker is merely an irritation, to be dealt with. Parker himself states
that the Alien leaves "no blood, nothing" when it grabs Dallas. 

The "among others", is Kane... who is also a special case 8^)

-- 
  ___  __  __  __  ___ 
  \  \ \/ /  \ \/ /  /  WEYLAND-YUTANI BIOWEAPONS DIVISION
   \  \  /    \  /  /   "Bringing The Universe Back Home."
    \  \/  /\  \/  /    ------------------------------------
     \    /  \    /     JJ Glamma aka James William Bennetts
      \  / /\ \  /      jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU
       ~~  ~~  ~~   
 Building Better Worlds
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIENS 1-2-3
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:09:21 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)

From article <1992Aug21.120846.15341@engage.pko.dec.com>, by
boyajian@rub writes...

> (Soothing, as to a small child) Well, you know, they did not really
> intend to wait so long to get off the planet.  They just couldn't
> because they had lost their dropship and there was nobody on the ship
> to figure out that perhaps a crashed dropship meant they were in
> trouble.  So perhaps half of them would have been saved.  But of
> course, that would have reduced the body count.  So instead of finding
> a credible excuse, we just leave the viewer with an incredible
> premise.

    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.

+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Gary Bradley        |   "You receive a love letter from me and |
| ORACLE Corp, UK     |                  you're f*cked forever!" |
| Edinburgh, SCOTLAND |        - Frank Booth ("Blue Velvet")     |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| "God damn the censor man"                                      |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
From: JW83HISW@MIAMIU.BITNET
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Judge Dredd movie!!!Like the subject line says, there is a Judge Dredd movie in the
Date: 4 Sep 92 14:15:55 GMT
Organization: Miami University - Academic Computer Service

works.  Dredd is a comic book character, a futuristic cop, that was
created in England and imported to the U.S.  The cool thing is the
guy who's going to play Dredd . . . Arnold Schwarzenegger!
     This is no rumor.  A producer named Pressman is looking at scripts
now, and Arnold has agreed to do the movie.  The budget for F/X alone
is $50 million!  This is going to be the next BIG SF/action movie, and
will hopefully do justice(pun intended!) to the Judge Dredd character.
     IMO - Arnold is perfect for Dredd.  The lasting success of the
movie will hinge on the script and the supporting cast - effects won't
be important, as long as they aern't cheap looking.