HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: All Time Dumb Line (was Re: Startrek VI - the video)
Date: 14 Sep 92 18:41:37 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <95777@bu.edu> kuchar@buast7.bu.edu (Tom Kuchar) writes:

>No, that's just vague. The (one of) all time dumb line is
>`We all feed on death, even vegetarians.'

Oh, I don't know.  I thought:

"We've recorded surface temperatures of -285 degrees Centigrade." to be a
pretty stupid line

(Think about it)

-- 
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: leifmk@Lise.Unit.NO (Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y)
Subject: Re: I think Alien^3 has been flogged to death.
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:27:04 GMT

In article <Bu71wq.Lpv@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
 > 
 >      I've noticed that this newsgroup tends to flog a dead horse until
 >      all you've got left are bones and hair.  
 > 
 >         re: Alien^3
 >         ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!
 > 
 >         Let's not make this another Terminator2, shall we?

No, I have a better idea:  Let's take up flogging T2 again!  ;)

Leif
No .sig, no employer;
if my opinions offend you, good for you!
From: espen.aarseth@hf.uib.no (Espen Aarseth)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien^3: religious and pre-modern
Date: 6 Sep 92 13:35:23 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.movies
Organization: University of Bergen

In article <5522@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea
Wasp) wrote:
> 
> In article <espen.aarseth-050992130518@hdbea.hf-fak.uib.no> espen.aarseth@hf.uib.no (Espen Aarseth) writes:
> >Alien^3 is in many ways a much more focused and *meaningful*
> >film than Aliens.
> 
> 	A lovely line -- unfortunately, one which is in itself virtually
> MEANINGLESS, since "meaningful", in critic terms, is a throwaway term used
> with great weight but never defined save by the critic using it.

Of course it appears meaningless IN ITSELF, cut out of context by you.
In my article however, it was not by itself, but elaborated and backed
up by what followed. I am not very impressed by this style of argument.

> 	"Andy"? That's the first time *I* have ever seen that abbreviation
> for "android" ("I prefer the term artificial person, myself").

Let's not make a virtue of ignorance. It's a classic term; look it up
in _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?_ (1968) by Philip Dick.

> 	And I fail to see "gothic romance" in the android bringing down
> the ship. Suspense, yes, but "GOTHIC ROMANCE"?

I'll try to explain. Many of the ideas and mythical imagery of the Alien-
movies come from the gothic tradition of the 18-19th centuries. Gloomy
scenery; monsters; dark, forbidden skies; thunder and lightning; that
sort of thing. In the particular scene I mentioned, it was not so much
the action of bringing down the ship as the mood of the whole setting
that reminded me of the gothic movement.

Gothic romance is a name for the tradition which includes Mary Shelley's
_Frankenstein_, Bram Stoker's _Dracula_ and many others. This tradition is
generally recognized as an important foundation for what we call science
fiction (and remember, "romance" is not the same as "love story". Look
it up in any basic textbook on literary history). 

Indeed, Alien seems particularly inspired by the Draculean myth, what with
the monster that pseudo-sexually impregnates its victims (instead of just
chomping them to death) and is devilishly hard to kill. (And even in
Aliens,
there are other similarities, such as the motive of the isolated village
haunted by Evil.)

If you prefer the Viet Nam-oriented them-against-us action of Aliens to the
low-tech gloom of Alien^3, there is not much to argue about. It is a
question
of cultural background, experience and taste. And as the Romans used to
say,
the right to criticize is bought by any fool along with the entrance
ticket.

> 	"Bad." The word you are looking for is "bad." It was almost 
> unbelievably BAD. 

Please. This kind of rudeness isn't even funny. Whatever suggested to you
that I were looking for something?

espen
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien^3: religious and pre-modern
Date: 5 Sep 92 17:03:22 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <espen.aarseth-050992130518@hdbea.hf-fak.uib.no> espen.aarseth@hf.uib.no (Espen Aarseth) writes:
>Alien^3 is in many ways a much more focused and *meaningful*
>film than Aliens.

	A lovely line -- unfortunately, one which is in itself virtually
MEANINGLESS, since "meaningful", in critic terms, is a throwaway term used
with great weight but never defined save by the critic using it.

 While "Alien 1" is certainly by far the most innovative
>of the trillogy, with classical scenes of horror excellently combined 
>with the science fiction elements, Aliens is very different, a postmodern
>action thriller too much in love with its own techno-aesthetics (remember
>those scenes with the exo-sceleton?), but apart from the "pumping iron"-
>feel it did have some stunning moments of gothic romance, like when 
>the andy brought down the ship with the portable on the roof.

	"Andy"? That's the first time *I* have ever seen that abbreviation
for "android" ("I prefer the term artificial person, myself").

	Anyway, the scenes earlier with the exoskeleton are necessary to 
set up the climax, and were very effective in that (and in establishing
a necessary rapport between Ripley and the Marines).

	And I fail to see "gothic romance" in the android bringing down
the ship. Suspense, yes, but "GOTHIC ROMANCE"?

>Fictions and movies are not mathematical systems, and the hunt for "plot-
>holes" and inconsistencies in *fantasy*-artefacts is more a sign that *we*
>did not like the product than what caused our dislike. (And anyway Goedel
>deconstructed mathematics more than sixty years ago, so why worry about
>fiction.) If I really like a movie, e.g. Gilliam's Brazil, it is easy
>to ignore "logical" flaws.

	That may be YOU, but it ain't ME. I LOVED Aliens, and the Star
Wars series, and so on, but I still find plotholes in ALL of them. Heck,
I can poke holes in Casablanca if I want to. (gotta see that again, come
to think of it.). 

	The search for plotholes may be a sign you don't like it; for me,
it's a simple piece of entertainment -- both the finding of the plot hole
and the attempt to find ways to explain it.

>as Jeanne d'Arc, 85 as Judas); very pre-modern compared to Aliens's
>post-modernity. Within the obvious limits of Hollywoodian demands,
>its almost unbelievably good.

	"Bad." The word you are looking for is "bad." It was almost 
unbelievably BAD. 
	The relentless gloom-and-doom of Alien^3 is really far more akin
to the run of the mill horror film with its invulnerable slashing psychos
than it is to "good films" -- the only difference is the budget and 
the attempts to cover it with a veneer of pretentious self-involved BS.

                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Alien^3: religious and pre-modern
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:18:12 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)

In article <equnlivn.715945716@unix1.tcd.ie>, equnlivn@unix1.tcd.ie
(Eoin P. O'Coindealbhain) writes:
|>
|>From article <5536@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, by news@pitt.edu (USENET
News System):
|>> Only a rather rabid Freudian would find much sexual about
|>> the Alien. [...] 
|>
|>		Having seen a lot of Geiger's work(he designed the 
|>	Alien) I would suggest that he did design it with a strong
|>	sexual image.A lot of Geiger's work takes what many people
|>	would consider pornographic and gives it a twist that turns
|>	it into something that's anything but sexualy stimutating
|>	(except to the most warped of minds).
|>		Dead Kennedys were charged with pornography after
|>	giving a Geiger poster "Penis Landscape" away w/ one of 
|>	their albums but charges were dismissed by the jury because
|>	the poster was too 'horrible' to sexualy arouse (the picture
|>	was a 'landscape' of penii penitrating vaginas,all of which
|>	was in an advanced stage of decay).
                 
    Ah. The very picture that adorns my bedroom wall (along with
countless other Giger posters). The album was "Frankenchrist".

+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| 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: jjonsson@alexandria.lib.utah.edu
Subject: Re: Query: Unicorn in Blade Runner
Organization: Marriott Library, University of Utah
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 20:07:09 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.091737.1@geovax.ed.ac.uk> brigid@geovax.ed.ac.uk writes:

>If this new director's cut of Blade Runner contains the dream
>sequence with the unicorn, can anyone tell me if these shots
>were unused footage filmed for the original or were they filmed 
>specially for this version? 

The "famous" unicorn is actually one shot. Not a scene, or sequence, just 
one little shot, which lasts approximately 8-12 seconds on screen.


Jeff Jonsson
Marriott Library System Support, University of Utah.
==============================================================================
--"It's the sound of the secret--  jjonsson@alexandria.lib.utah.edu
-- machinery at the center of  --  jjonsson@utahlib.bitnet
-- the world." -Cliff Steele   --  "You talkin' to me?"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: zerobeat@intacc.uucp (Ferenc Szabo)
Subject: Re: DROP THE DISCUSSION OF ALIENS ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 17:38:13 GMT
Organization: Inter/Access' Matrix BBS

In article <5SEP199210191736@zeus.tamu.edu> mjm3170@zeus.tamu.edu (MATTSON, MATTHEW JUL) writes:
>HOW LONG ARE YOU PEOPLE GOING TO KEEP DISCUSSING THE SAME THREADS
>OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER.....
>
>ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!
>
I'll assume 2 things:

A)  You are profoundly misinformed as to how many people in the world have 
    access to this newsgroup

                              OR

B)  You are profoundly anal retentive.

       SOLUTIONS:

Don't read threads/articles with the word Alien in the subject line.  It's
kinda like changing the channel when 'Who's The Boss' comes on tv.

Pray that nobody ever makes a movie again that might generate a lot of 
discussion in this nsgrp (T3, 2060:A Space Odyssey, Alien 4, Star Wars 1
or 7)

Ponder this deep thought:  The entire world of netters do not collectively
post at the same time.  On VERY few netters keep on replying to repeated
thread ideas, and usually because they have a keener insight (usually from
previous discussion on the net itself).


One thing I hadn't thought of: Perhaps your newsreader software is so
archaic that it doesn't allow for selected reading of threads.  Maybe 
you have to sequentially read EVERY article (or hit the 'n' key EVERY
single time as opposed to skipping entire threads).

It this is indeed the case then I can TOTALLY see your frustration
because I logged on a system like that 10 years ago once.  It would be
like reading the entire TV GUIDE just to find out what's on THursday
at 9:30pm.

ferenc
From: 6069870@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: 2 Re: Blade Runner Director's Cut (SPOILERS)
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 21:58:14 GMT


All of those moments lost in time.............like tear drops........in rain.



------------------------- Original Article -------------------------
In article <y3hqbbcn@cck.coventry.ac.uk>, gdg019@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Ridley McIn
|> In article <1992Sep14.182519.4982@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> kachun@astro.as.
|> >In article <zggqbgzn@cck.coventry.ac.uk> gdg019@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Ridley M
|> >>If by the extra violence you mean the scene where Pris sticks her fingers u
|> >>Deckard's nose and tries to wrench it off (Ford's idea at the time), then I
|> >>sorry, but we don't get that scene here in Britain, either.
|> >>
|> >>From what I can gather, the British version is the same as the American ver
|> >
|> >I feel kinda sorry for you Brits then.  I think the Aussies have the origina
|> >American version too.
|> >
|> >Anyhow, yes the fingers in Deckard's nose is one shot that was deleted.  The
|> >other two were shots of Roy's thumbs plunging into Tyrell's eye sockets and
|> >blood flowing out, and a shot of the nail puncturing through the top of Roy'
|> >hand.  All three shots totalled less than seventeen (or fifteen?) seconds so
|> >one didn't miss that much.  However for the purist, I guess it's a little
|> >different.
|>
|> Jesus, you mean the Americans never got those scenes. I take it all back, we
|> DO get the International/European version. I can't see how the film could
|> exist without just those simple cuts.
|>
|> --
|>         	 **Ridley McIntyre - Ronin Ironpig**			
|> 		     gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk
|> 		 -----------------------------------
|>      		    "He's in a world of his own."

I didn't keep up very well with this thread, but I have the Criterion
CLV letterbox version of BR and it has those scenes in it.

--
Thanks,

Steve McClure		internet:	Steve.McClure@ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM
NCR MCPD Columbia 	uucp:		...!uunet!ncrlink!ncrcae!steve.mcclure
3325 Platt Springs Rd	Ma Bell:	(803) 796-9250
West Columbia, SC 29169
Disclaimer:	The above are my opinions and are not NCR official policy.
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Plot holes in Alien^3 (*S
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:33:29 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)

Montague_Kevin@Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev) writes...

> Let's try some chemistry. 
> Glass doesn't shatter after being "damaged by acid."  This is what I meant by
> "seared" through it. . .the acid would just melt a hole through the tube, as
> it did through Kane's helmet.  Recall also that it happened Very quickly in
> the first movie, as the f'hugger attached to Kane. . .but that's a plot hole
> for another time. . .

    No. There is no evidence that the face hugger melts through Kane's
helmet quickly. We see Kane looking at the open egg. We hear the screech
and something propels out. There are a few frames showing it around the
outside of Kane's helmet, then the scene cuts. The next time we see
Kane's helmet, the face hugger has melted through it onto his face. But
this is back on the Nostromo. Lambert and Dallas have carried Kane 2000
metres and got back on board. There is no evidence it melted through
very quickly, it had all the time in the world.

   And anyway, if people are going to yell plothole about this aspect of
Alien 3, there is an even larger one in Aliens. How come the 2 face
huggers don't melt their way out of the tubes they are found in in Med Lab? 

+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| 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: CDOMS@VAX1.UMKC.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Blade Runner, Scott's cut.
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:23:45 GMT

Blade Runner, the director's cut has made it to our town.  I have seen
it, it has dropped the happy ending and the voice over.  Plus some of the
scenes are longer.

Has anyone else seen this?  What are your thoughts, comments on Scott's
version.

It was a joy to see the visual work on a large screen again.  I thought
I could appreciate the visuals better w/o the voice over (however, there
were times in my mind that I could hear the voice over for certain scenes
Arggghhh!)

Carol Doms
cdoms@umkcvax1
cdoms@vax1.umkc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows)
Subject: Why not use the Kill command on topics you don't like (i.e. Alie
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 06:06:07 GMT


I _DO_ use the Kill command--on the chains that say (in bold capital
letters) STOP DISCUSSING ALIENS ALREADY, YOU'RE GIVING ME A HERNIA (or
some other such nonsense).  I'm getting a bit tired of Aliens as well,
but the volume of Aliens posts is dropping off, and I can only conclude
that many of the people who had been discussing it are tiring of it as
well.

---Chris Meadows
From: gt6346c@prism.gatech.EDU (Brian Dalton)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Startrek VI - the video
Date: 8 Sep 92 17:20:49 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1473@frackit.UUCP> dmav@frackit.UUCP (Dave Mavretic) writes:
>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.
>
>tape, I see it is the same as the movie as well.
> I don't know what was wrong with the tape you had. But I would check it
>out with the company you rented it from, and let them know what's up!!
>
>	Mav

Sorry Mav.  I rented it when it was released and Dave's right.
As a matter of fact there are THREE restored scenes.  The videos
with the cut material are widely distributed so if I were you I'd
check those fast forwarding tapes.

The other two scenes are as follows:

In the conference room with the president and the military officials.
There was a scene that discribed a plan to rescue Dr. McCoy and Kirk
from Rura Pente(sp?).  The president asked about what if this started a 
war and the officers response was something kinda silly like 'WE'LL
KICK THERE AFTERBURNERS` or something equally stupid.

Later on when Scotty and Spock are in the torpedo bay discussing the
mystery, Valeris comes down a pole and they have a nice chat.  I know
that this was not in the thaetre release because I saw the actress who
played Valeris(I have forgotten name, but God! she's cute) and she
mentioned the scene and how she was upset by its being cut from the
theater's release.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
And there was of course the scene where the mask is ripped off of the 
would-be assassin and its the officer who gave the briefing on 
Kirk and McCoys rescue plan.  In this scene is also General Worf who
pulls the mask off.                                                   
                                                                       
Hope this helps
brian


-- 

---------------------------------------
Brian Dalton              gt6346c@prism
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Startrek VI - the video
From: ace@kryton.UUCP (Catherine Beckstead)
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 92 13:39:19 PDT
Organization: Paradox Alley F&SF BBS 805-492-8789

dmav@frackit.UUCP (Dave Mavretic) writes:

> In article <11210002@iftccu.boeing.com>, nebres@iftccu.boeing.com (Dan Nebres
> > 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.
> 
>  Huh? Where did you rent that movie?  I would recommend you check it out
> through them! There is something not so right in that at all!
>  As I type, I am fast forwarding through the first of two tapes I have
> of this movie. The first (the one that is fast forwarding now), is the
> movie itself, exactly as the studio sold it to a hotel chain, for their
> clients.
>  It is uncut and unchanged from the movie I saw at the theater. As I am
> watching that part now, I see that there is some red blood, but no
> redder than the klingon blood earlier in the movie. There is no mask
> pulled away.
>  The second one is fast forwarding now. It is a copy of the one I rented
> from a national video rental chain, and copied on my vcr's. On this
> tape, I see it is the same as the movie as well.
>  I don't know what was wrong with the tape you had. But I would check it
> out with the company you rented it from, and let them know what's up!!
> 
> 	Mav

Well the one I rented, the one marked "2 minutes of footage added", has
this additional scene among others.  As far as I knew all the tapes had
these added two minutes.  If you look in the rec.arts.startrek.*
faq, there is mention of this and a list of what the new footage includes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Catherine Beckstead                    ace@kryton.uucp
"Do you want to argue with a can of deodorant that registers
NINE on the Richter scale?"        --Ace, in "Dragonfire"
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:6937 rec.arts.movies:27098
From: dave@blackbox.cc.columbia.edu (David Milner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Godzilla / Nike TV Ad
Date: 8 Sep 92 14:44:02 GMT
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Sep8.120859.15128@walter.bellcore.com> ahom@yingjow.tnds.bellcore.com (Allen Hom) writes:
>In article <1992Sep8.031311.20282@news.columbia.edu>, dave@blackbox.cc.columbia.edu (David Milner) writes:
>|> The next GODZILLA VS. CHARLES BARKLEY commercial will be debuted
>|> during the MTV Video Music Awards on Sept. 9th.
>|> 
>|> David Milner  Columbia University
>|> inet:   dave@blackbox.cc.columbia.edu
>|> usenet: ...rutgers!columbia!blackbox!dave
>|>         ...rutgers!columbia!blackbox.cc.columbia.edu!dave
>
>I just saw Entertainment Tonight last night, and they featured a story
>about this commercial.  Looks like Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic was
>involved with the special effects, so it should be pretty good...:-)
>-- 
>allen hom
>Bellcore
>ahom@tnds.bellcore.com
>(908)699-5728

Yes, ILM did the effects for the commercial.


David Milner  Columbia University
inet:   dave@blackbox.cc.columbia.edu
usenet: ...rutgers!columbia!blackbox!dave
        ...rutgers!columbia!blackbox.cc.columbia.edu!dave
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies