HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? Nothing!
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 04:25:26 GMT

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

>I'm not defending Alien 3.  I do consider Alien 3 the low point in the
>series.  But I think the trend was already directed downwards.

I think both the first two films were masterpieces of a totally different kind.

>>>> -an alien(s) that acted consistently and was implacable.
>>>Not in Aliens.
>> How was the Aliens behaviour inconsistent in that film?

>It was inconsistent with Alien.  They also were not implacable, but

How?

>were shown as cannon fodder and with a specific unconvincing social
>organization.

There was no social organisation in the first film.

>They killed lots of Marines under the reactor (due to

They killed one. Wierzbowski. Presumably by accident, as he was already badly
injured, and he seemed to be treated with about as much "care" as Dietrich.

The others that died in the firefight were...

Frost (flamed by Dietrich)
Crowe (killed by the explosion of Frost's bag)
Drake (killed by flying acid)

Dietrich and Apone were captured, just like Dallas and Brett.

>their own and Gorman's stupidity, I agree), but Ripley simply walks up
>to the queen to get Newt back.  And so on.  (OK, I won't start that
>discussion again)

Most of the Aliens were at the colony. A dropship moves a little faster than
a walking Alien, I'd assume.

-- 
  ___  __  __  __  ___ 
  \  \ \/ /  \ \/ /  /  WEYLAND-YUTANI BIOWEAPONS DIVISION
   \  \  /    \  /  /   "Bringing The Universe Back Home."
    \  \/  /\  \/  /    ------------------------------------
     \    /  \    /     JJ Glamma aka James William Bennetts
      \  / /\ \  /      jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU
       ~~  ~~  ~~   
 Building Better Worlds

-- 
  ___  __  __  __  ___ 
  \  \ \/ /  \ \/ /  /  WEYLAND-YUTANI BIOWEAPONS DIVISION
   \  \  /    \  /  /   "Bringing The Universe Back Home."
    \  \/  /\  \/  /    ------------------------------------
     \    /  \    /     JJ Glamma aka James William Bennetts
      \  / /\ \  /      jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU
       ~~  ~~  ~~   
 Building Better Worlds
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Even MORE crap on the Alien trilogy
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 16:33:33 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <2747@nlsun1.oracle.nl> gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley) writes:

>  Aha! I knew someone would try this one! You're forgetting one
>important factor...all those colonists are dead, except ONE (which I
>counted in my original argument). There is NO EVIDENCE to Ripley at all
>that they were coccooned while alive. Of course they is no evidence to
>say they were cocooned while dead, either. My point is that as far as
>Ripley can deduce, Aliens kill you immediately, then do what they like.
>All the EVIDENCE she has seen so far (from Alien AND Aliens) should have
>made her say "Newt is fucked, let's GO!!". Hence, I still say that
>Ripley saying "They don't kill you" is a convenient plot hole in Aliens.

Ripley has seen 2 chestbursters 'hatch' from hosts. In both
cases, the hosts were *alive* just before the hatching started.
Ripley has also seen a facehugger attached to a *living* human,
read the colony medical reports (you forgot about this), knows
Dallas and possibly Brett were snatched away *live*. Ripley sees a
*live* colonist cocooned up, with a chestburster hatching. She sees
other colonists now dead on the walls with their chests ripped
out with looks of pain on their faces.

Ripley also knows that there are no more hosts for the Aliens
left on LV-426 besides the captured marines and Newt. If the
Aliens eat them, there aren't gonna be no more Aliens. She does
have a clue.

I think she'd realize what the Aliens intended. Even if Newt was
now Purina Alien Snacks, Ripley wouldn't know either way and go
after her. When she found the transmitter, she figured it was too
late already.

Joshua
    "Each woman is a promise that she can't keep that appeals to
  a hope you can't control." - joe theseus, Deadface: Earth Water Air Fire

  jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca   Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary 

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: PLEASE - No more Alien posts!
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 04:21:14 GMT
Organization: Sporadic and incomplete

gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green) writes:

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

How about learning how to use a killfile?

/Alien/:j

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

'twas brillig and the slithy tiles / did lewis carroll in the wabe.
all mimsy were the pedophiles / and the mail paths outgrabe.
From: v129j6ed@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (This is F.U.N.)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:08:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <9223901.1740@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>, jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes...
>v129j6ed@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (This is F.U.N.) writes:
>Footage cut from the final cut of the film showed Brett and Dallas cocooned.
>Brett had mutated into an egg, and Dallas had either been impregnated by said
>egg or was turning into an egg himself. I understand that this footage may be
>restored in a new release of the laserdisc later this year.

I haven't seen Alien for a while, but I remember that the last 2 caught by
the Alien looked pretty dead. In fact the guy looking for the cat was bleeding.
I will have to take a look at this, but I am sure that in the first movie
the Alien draws blood.  For them to capture and cocoon may involve a queen
to be in the area, since she is the one who creates the eggs.

>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.)

When they state that? I don't remember that, but I would like to know where
to find it. 

Oh, and I like your sense of humor. ;)

*******************************************************************************
"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: gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIEN question
Date: 26 Aug 92 01:40:44 GMT
Organization: CSIRO ITS

In article <1992Aug25.045103.2936@u.washington.edu> daynem@byron.u.washington.edu (Dayne Miller) writes:
>Anyone know where the names NOSTROMO and SULACO come from? Do they have any 
>significance we should all know about?
>
>     Dayne Miller
>       daynem@u.washington.edu

NO NO NO

You're ALL wrong!

NOSTROMO is the name of the ships you get in that all time classic
arcade game "Galaxian"

-- 
* 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.movies
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:27:27 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <#yan4mc@lynx.unm.edu> 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.

Here's my score sheet for Alien:

Kane - killed by the chestburster, body 'spaced'.
Brett - grabbed, the Alien does the toothy-tongue thing, and we
  hear moans and cries that fade out. (My personal guess is that
  he was lobotomized, the wound cauterized by acid. The photo
  I've seen of the cocooned Brett shows massive head trauma.)
Dallas - grabbed in the ducts. 'No blood, no Dallas, nothing.'
  (Evidently cocooned.)
Ash - Okay, just included here for completeness.
Parker - tounged through the neck. Lots of gore.
Lambert - the tail goes up behind her. We hear her scream, start
  to choke/hyperventilate, then scream with finality. Ripley
  finds her dead, dripping blood. Prolly either got her thru the
  back with the tail and/or punched a hole thru her head.

Mother - I think Ripley's axe said it best.
Alien - Fry, sucker, fry!
Ripley - survives this one, the next sequel, and bites in in 3.
Jonesy - With any luck, he's still alive and kicking.

I always knew the cat'd outlast the humans. More survival
instinct than the rest of 'em put together.

Joshua
   _  _      "Thats a good idea!"  "I have those every once in a while."
 -(_)(_)-      "Why do you listen to me when I'm wrong?!?"
 \      /          - Dr. Goldfoot and the Bikini Machine
  |  . |      
  -____-      jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca 
 /  \/  \     Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary
From: hlj@posix.COM (Hal Jespersen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Possible Foundation movie?
Date: 27 Aug 92 14:50:51 GMT
Organization: POSIX Software Group, Redwood City, CA

shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu (Sergey Shimkevich) writes:
: I would rather not see "The Forever War". I didn't like the book at all, sort
: of like a black-and-white leftist answer to Heinlein's "Starship Troopers". 
: Now a REAL version of "Starship Troopers" is another story.

I would have loved to see a S.T. movie, but I'm afraid that Aliens [II]
ripped off too many concepts for the original to be made now:  space
marines (= mobile infantry), dropships, female pilots, "bug hunts,"
powered armor.  The original would now seem derivative.  About the only
thing left out was the political philosophy, and I can't imagine that
would have survived in a movie of S.T., anyway.

Hal
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:6603 rec.arts.movies:25775
From: daynem@byron.u.washington.edu (Dayne Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Script Query: _The_Princess_Bride_
Date: 26 Aug 92 04:13:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Aug26.041332.25192
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Aug25.143555.19153@Princeton.EDU> spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes:
>
>:-)  but the whole scene is a gem... (even if it is bullshit
>swordfighting, which someone has said on this newsgroup before)
>
    I've taken some fencing classes myself, and my instructor has been the 
Northwest champion several times in (I believe) epee and foil. He's also in 
training for the 1996 Olympic fencing team. Anyway, according to what I've
been taught, the fencing in The Princess Bride, while somewhat contrived and
actually quite slow, is one of the more accurate examples of swordplay in 
any movie. Hamlet (w/ Mel Gibson) is better, and shows several different 
styles, (disclaimer: I haven't seen Hamlet myself; this is second-hand info)
but most other movies are absolute trash. Highlander was a joke, Hook was a 
curious mixture of the ridiculous with the (surprisingly) decent, and most 
others are worse. This is not only my opinion; my instructor was responsible 
for most of these evaluations, and while hardly qualified to be a judge of
truly high-quality swordplay, I have to concur with his opinions.

   Just in case anyone cared...

     -Dayne Miller
        daynem@u.washington.edu

 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: welter@fwi.uva.nl (Richard Welter)
Subject: Re: Aliens ^3: Should I Watch It?
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:28:04 GMT

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

Yes definately go see it, just remember that it's Alien^3 and not Aliens 2.

Richard

-- 
*                         X      Computer Science                   /        *
*    Richard J. Welter   |X|  University of Amsterdam           \  /         *
*                         X                                     CIAmiga      *
*      "Marshmallows! Ben, where are those hickory sticks?!"  - Jerry        *
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: A really silly argument about ship names in Alien movies
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:49:49 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Aug26.195047.26526@sura.net>, by wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes):
> In article <5812@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:
>>From article <1992Aug25.215809.14447@sura.net>, by wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes):
> this is a deliberate tribute both to the original and Conrad's work.

To put this discussion on another tack: Why DID Ridley Scott's choose
"Nostromo" (apart from his being a Joseph Conrad fan)?  Just for the
great sound of the name? Or is there a deeper significance?  Nostromo
was a trusted subordinate who succumbed to temptation when entrusted
with a load of silver in an emergency situation.  Something of a
correspondence with the "Nostromo", though it's not really adequate to
speak of "temptation" in that case.

> If you don't like this sort of sly self-referentialism in movies, fine.
> But don't degrade yourself by insulting the intelligence of the movie-
> makers simply because you didn't enjoy what they did.  

OK, I agree.  Intelligence was not really what I was aiming at.  Taste
is more like it.  "Whoever decided on that name should be declared
devoid of good taste."  Not quite what I want, but better.

> I won't even bother boring you with explanations like, "Well, maybe
> Conrad has become wildly popular in the future and everyone quotes
> him, the way a lot of people like to quote Shakespeare now," or
> "Perhaps there's a new naming convention centered around literature,"

Commendable :-)

> or the ever-popular "It's a ^*%$ing movie, lighten up!"...

If that were your opinion, you should have stopped reading this thread
long ago.


-- 
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: 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 02:33:35 GMT

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

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

>>Events: 1.Dropship lands - APC drives off, dropship then lands somewhere else.
>>        2.Marines & co. drive off to atmosphere processor.
>>        3.Spunkmyer takes equipment to Bishop.
>>        4.Marines get in a spot of bother(Ferro & Spunkmyer both know this but
>>          only think Aliens are under the AP.)
>>        5.Alien gets on dropship, DS takes off then crashes due to Alien
>>          killing Ferro. DS destroys APC in the crash.

>>Simple.

>And also very stupid, leaving your door open in enemy territory without guard.

It *wasn't* "enemy territory". Also people do make mistakes; things go wrong; noones perfect...

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 04:15:14 GMT

gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley) writes:

>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

I think cut scenes DO count... sometimes... certainly when they don't contradict
the screened print. Especially if they explain things like your "plot hole"
which is only a "plot hole" because you think that what doesn't happen on screen
doesn't happen.

Guess Ripley doesn't go to the toilet, ever. After all, we never see her go...

>   Incidently, isn't the mopping up needed cause the guy fell into a
>fan??                        

Yeah, but there is another mopping scene.
-- 
  ___  __  __  __  ___ 
  \  \ \/ /  \ \/ /  /  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: nebres@iftccu.boeing.com (Dan Nebres)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Startrek VI - the video
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:53:32 GMT
Organization: Boeing Commercial Airplane Group

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.

dan
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 01:19:25 GMT

gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley) writes:

>In article <u906789.714793601@bruny>, u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark
>Julian Turner) writes:
>|>mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:
>|>
>|>>From article
><1992Aug24.074940.12623@arbi.Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>, by
>Onno.Meyer@arbi.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de (Onno Meyer):
>|>>> If aliens shows a first contact scenario, a lot of mistakes (like leaving
>|>>> the dropship vulnerable to attack) might be explained.  The poor marines
>|>>> never encountered anything but human colonists.
>|>
>|>>No, the marines were presented as battle-hardened veterans (to show
>|>>off Gorman's inexperience better).  Actually, the way they handled the
>|>>dropship would have been dumb against any kind of opponent (regardless
>|>>OF whether they fought aliens or humans before).
>|>
>|>But, Gorman had declared "the area is secure". The aliens were only
>known to be
>|>in the area of the reactor. Spunkmyer was hardly to know there was an alien
>|>roaming around when he took the equipment to Bishop...
>|>

>   The Aliens weren't "known" to anywhere. The marines had no idea what
>they would meet or where when the parked the dropship. IMHO the marines
>fucked up big style. God! I am now a confessed "Aliens" trivia junkie,
>despite trying for so long for so hard to avoid threads like these!

Events: 1. Dropship lands - APC drives off, dropship then lands somewhere else.
        2. Marines & co. drive off to atmosphere processor.
        3. Spunkmyer takes equipment to Bishop.
        4. Marines get in a spot of bother(Ferro & Spunkmyer both know this but           only think Aliens are under the AP.)
        5. Alien gets on dropship, DS takes off then crashes due to Alien                  killing Ferro. DS destroys APC in the crash.

Simple.
From: slb3y@cc.usu.edu (Punk Rocketeer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Alien^3? How much bandwidth do we have?
Date: 1 Sep 92 23:26:03 MDT
Organization: United Order of Non-joiners

In article <9224202.1268@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>,
jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma) writes:
> *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.

     I have somewhere a photo novel of the movie Alien.  You know, a
sort of comic book made up from individual frames.  In it, Brett bled
pretty well.  Not "lovely gouts" per se, but the alien still had it's
"tongue" in him.  I presume they did not reshoot the scene.

> 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.

     Agreed.  My biggest problem with the film.  A horror movie SHOULD
have suspense.
-- 
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.
From: wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIEN question
Date: 25 Aug 92 21:58:09 GMT
Organization: SURAnet, College Park, MD, USA, NA, Earth, Milky Way

In article <5808@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:
>Have you ever heard of the phrase "dumb in joke"?  I don't need people
>wrecking the plausibility of film props just to show off their
>literacy.  Sort of like Clarke's use of the phrase "Hofstadter-Moebius-Loop" 
>in 2010 (the novel - I don't remember whether it was in the film). Bleah.

Some people just have *no* sense of humor...8->
-- 
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.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (Two days and a wake-up...)
Subject: Re: Watchmen
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 17:40:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.111018.417@comp.lancs.ac.uk>, ega015@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Robert Edge) writes...

} Can anybody tell me any more news on turning Alan Moores Comic book
} "Watchmen" into a movie. The last i heard was that Terry Gilliam was
} going to direct it.

The project is on indefinite hold. Gilliam left the project long ago
(before he made THE FISHER KING, to give this some perspective). At
this point, I consider it a totally dead project.

-- 

	I'm so short, I have to look up to see down.

--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian)

    boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (until Friday, September 4, 1992)

    "The word is given."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies