FLM films - My Webpage

1996-10-11 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (Sam Deth <samdeth@neworld.net>)


Karen Fung wrote: > > S > > P > > O > > L > > E > > R > > A > > L > > E > > R > > T > > This, I suppose, was one of those episodes that explore the character a > little more than the world. We saw that dark side in Quinn, and we saw > just how....how could I put it....*bad* the professor could be. But there > were a few things I found wrong with it, but they're not the really really > small things, so nitpick-haters, don't flame me. I'm not complaining that > Quinn's hair was out of place or something. :) Ok, this won't be a flame then :) > > EXCUSE ME!#1. I guess the writer of that episode decided to ignore > everything Brad Linaweaver wrote in the novel. The whole basis of the > episode was on the fact that Quinn's father died when he was 11, yet in the > book, Quinn's father lived to see Quinn get into Berkley. And the thing > related to this might be that had Quinn's father died earlier, the series > premiere might have been different. Brad Linaweaver had Mr. Mallory die later for the sake of the flashback about Quinn's failed report. In the series Quinn's dad dies when he's 11. The series is canon, the novelazation is not 9especially since they conflict). If it makes you happier think that the Novel is a different set of Sliders visiting almost identical worlds ;). > > EXCUSE ME!#2. It seems to me Quinn got a little too good at burying > feelings. I think I'd feel pretty weird when I learned I kissed myself > ('Double Cross'), and I would feel equally if not more weird if I was > *willingly* kissing my teacher. But Quinn just seems to push it down his > throat and get on with it. I'm not talking from expierience, of > course--I've never kissed *any* version of my teacher, past or present. I > just kind of think that scene with the teacher was *kind* of unnecessary. A lot of boys fantasize about their teachers. While I did not fantasize about my 3rd grade teacher (she looked like Adoplh Hitler...even hast the moustache), I have fantasized about other, more attractive teachers, as I'm sure have many people here. He got to act on a fantasy a lot of kids have . Besides, she was a bit of a babe ;). > > EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just > thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. > They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was > behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and > invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as > it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we > would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different > size. That got me too, but I think it's somehow saying everything adapted to the somewhat shorter days, and aged accordingly. I too expected the "Time started later" explanation, but as someone here pointed out, that would merely be a free ticket to time travel to whereever they damn well please. Then it'll turn into Quantam Leap . > > But, the point of this episode was to see how Quinn turned out the way he > did, so I guess the only reason #3 exists is that the writer/producers > thought,"What about those sci-fi watcbers? Gotta give them > something....we'll just make up some mumbo jumbo and make Rembrandt get > confused so that we won't have to explain it more than we have to." I don't know if you've ever seen Red Dwarf, but Rembrandt seems to end up a lot like The Cat from RD. Whenever t is necessary to explain something to the audience they explain it to The Cat, who invariably gets totally confused, and makes the other characters have to go into detail. By having a character get confused it allows the writers to explain a theory in depth w/out forcing it too much. Rembrandt gets used for this alot, and I think they should use Wade for it more...lay off on Rembrandt some. Wade is just as dim in these matters as Remy, and she should be allowed to get just as confused. >The > same probably went for Arturo's unnamed terminal illness. Can you say sweeps week ploy? It's an interesting subplot, and I assume they'll develop it. I wonder what they'll do now that he has an "incurable", "inoperable","terminal" disease. > > Now, the good parts...they set the scene up for Quinn helping y.Quinn > pretty well. I thought he was going to teach y.Quinn to fight and he'd > turn into a violent, angry person. But Quinn was right; he did know what > he was doing. Quinn probably regretted hurting the bully later in life and > didn't want y.Quinn to regret it too. I think he wanbted to keep this Quinn from : 1. taking crap from bullies, and 2. not bust that kid's knee w/ the bat. > > This is just an obervation--it seems that almost every episode Quinn is > running off with some woman--Nicky in Rules, Logan in Double Cross, and now > Heather. I guess now if I had one question to ask the Sliders producers, > it won't be "Do you have any plans to get Quinn and Wade together?" > anymore. Gee, Jerry must have really meant it when he said he liked > make-out scenes. :) Well, last season it was Wade, this season it's Quinn :). > > Hi, I'm Karen Fung. Thanks for talking to me! you're welcome :) Sam Deth Mulder-Scully 96 Trust No One Else

1996-10-12 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (cyberkid@user1.channel1.com)


>> EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just >> thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. >> They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was >> behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and >> invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as >> it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we >> would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different >> size. Er, since there was no time before the big bang, it couldn't have started later. What they could have did is expanded arturo's speil a little more by prehaps pointing out that the Day's on this world were prehaps, idunno maybe 38 hours long or something (could have had a little bit with the sliders being time-lagged or something) - Will. --- Willam Cameron cyberkid@user1.channel1.com

1996-10-12 00:00:00 - The Guardian --- didn't copy any movie! (I think) - (amniem@world.std.com)


Thoughts on The Guardian. An older version of yourself appears and tells you not to read these spoilers: This episode didn't grab me on a science fiction level. But I think every guy that ever skipped a grade can relate to the schoolyard bullying. It made me recall a few bullies I hadn't thought about in years. For *ONCE* there was no endless moaning about altering the future. It always seemed stupid to me when time-traveling characters obsess about whether or not they are altering the future when their mere presense is creating <a number with a ridiculous amount of zeroes> tiny quantum changes every second, any of which could alter the world unrecognizably in a few years. Quinn, on the other hand, simply got in up to his elbows in his own past. Good for him. And before anyone bothers, I know they said it's not really the past. It still was like every (other) time-travel drama anyway. Did anybody else think of Van Halen's _Hot For Teacher_ when Quinn was talking about and then acting on his lust for his teacher, to his time-tricked teacher? Not a complaint, kinky is cool by me... After all the kissing and perhaps more, Quinn announces that he is older-Quinn at the end. If she felt any lust for older Quinn, isn't that going to leave the teacher kind of weirded out around little Quinn? Karen Fung writes: > EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just > thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. > They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was > behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and > invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as > it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we > would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different > size. The explanation actually makes sense. What the professor said would indeed have made for a slightly different relativistic frame of reference. But... how would he know? Does he measure the axis of rotation of every parallel earth? And it suggests that such time-differentials are common, which we haven't seen. > This is just an obervation--it seems that almost every episode Quinn is > running off with some woman--Nicky in Rules, Logan in Double Cross, and now > Heather. And lookers every one.

1996-10-12 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (Dutta <y312@unb.ca>)


On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, Karen Fung wrote: > EXCUSE ME!#1. I guess the writer of that episode decided to ignore > everything Brad Linaweaver wrote in the novel. The whole basis of the > episode was on the fact that Quinn's father died when he was 11, yet in the > book, Quinn's father lived to see Quinn get into Berkley. And the thing > related to this might be that had Quinn's father died earlier, the series > premiere might have been different. > The series premiere (if I remember right) was rather vague on the issue, and there's no reason fo the series to follow the novels exactly. > EXCUSE ME!#2. It seems to me Quinn got a little too good at burying > feelings. I think I'd feel pretty weird when I learned I kissed myself Agreed, but then again, trying to avoid getting killed/captured provided a fair amount of distraction from whatever wierd feelings he might have expressed. > ('Double Cross'), and I would feel equally if not more weird if I was > *willingly* kissing my teacher. But Quinn just seems to push it down his If I had a teacher who looked like that, wierdness wouldn't be what I'd be feeling! ;) > throat and get on with it. I'm not talking from expierience, of > course--I've never kissed *any* version of my teacher, past or present. I > just kind of think that scene with the teacher was *kind* of unnecessary. > I'll give you that, it was certainly not necessary, probably needed a filler. > They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was > behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and > invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as > it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we > would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different > size. That was such a lame explanation. Actually, the only reason I thought it was such a vague explanation was because, if the theory was actually what it sounded like (Earth has a longer day), it was incredibly stupid, and I mean STUPID! A longer day, say 26 hours or whatever, might have made the date on the calendar 1984, but people would still age the same! Neal Dutta

1996-10-12 00:00:00 - EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (GFung@unix.dsoe.com)


'The Guardian', to me, was one episode full of "EXCUSE ME!"'s. I didn't have a cold, BTW. :) Beware, those of you that think every episode of Sliders is great--although I have some good things to say about this episode, most of it is bad. S P O L E R A L E R T This, I suppose, was one of those episodes that explore the character a little more than the world. We saw that dark side in Quinn, and we saw just how....how could I put it....*bad* the professor could be. But there were a few things I found wrong with it, but they're not the really really small things, so nitpick-haters, don't flame me. I'm not complaining that Quinn's hair was out of place or something. :) EXCUSE ME!#1. I guess the writer of that episode decided to ignore everything Brad Linaweaver wrote in the novel. The whole basis of the episode was on the fact that Quinn's father died when he was 11, yet in the book, Quinn's father lived to see Quinn get into Berkley. And the thing related to this might be that had Quinn's father died earlier, the series premiere might have been different. EXCUSE ME!#2. It seems to me Quinn got a little too good at burying feelings. I think I'd feel pretty weird when I learned I kissed myself ('Double Cross'), and I would feel equally if not more weird if I was *willingly* kissing my teacher. But Quinn just seems to push it down his throat and get on with it. I'm not talking from expierience, of course--I've never kissed *any* version of my teacher, past or present. I just kind of think that scene with the teacher was *kind* of unnecessary. EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different size. But, the point of this episode was to see how Quinn turned out the way he did, so I guess the only reason #3 exists is that the writer/producers thought,"What about those sci-fi watcbers? Gotta give them something....we'll just make up some mumbo jumbo and make Rembrandt get confused so that we won't have to explain it more than we have to." The same probably went for Arturo's unnamed terminal illness. Now, the good parts...they set the scene up for Quinn helping y.Quinn pretty well. I thought he was going to teach y.Quinn to fight and he'd turn into a violent, angry person. But Quinn was right; he did know what he was doing. Quinn probably regretted hurting the bully later in life and didn't want y.Quinn to regret it too. This is just an obervation--it seems that almost every episode Quinn is running off with some woman--Nicky in Rules, Logan in Double Cross, and now Heather. I guess now if I had one question to ask the Sliders producers, it won't be "Do you have any plans to get Quinn and Wade together?" anymore. Gee, Jerry must have really meant it when he said he liked make-out scenes. :) Hi, I'm Karen Fung. Thanks for talking to me! gfung@unix.dsoe.com

1996-10-12 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (kvt3@columbia.edu)


GFung@unix.dsoe.com (Karen Fung) wrote: >'The Guardian', to me, was one episode full of "EXCUSE ME!"'s. I didn't >have a cold, BTW. :) Beware, those of you that think every episode of >Sliders is great--although I have some good things to say about this >episode, most of it is bad. >S >P >O >L >E >R >A >L >E >R >T >EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just >thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. >They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was >behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and >invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as >it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we >would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different >size. No, you didn't get it. It's not that the world revolved slower, but that it revolved FASTER. Thus, because of relativity (of which I admit I know almost nothing about), things happen on that world at a rate slightly slower than they do on other worlds (I think...)

1996-10-12 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (bycer45@futures.wharton.upenn.edu)


Kahlil Thomas (kvt3@columbia.edu) wrote: : GFung@unix.dsoe.com (Karen Fung) wrote: : >'The Guardian', to me, was one episode full of "EXCUSE ME!"'s. I didn't : >have a cold, BTW. :) Beware, those of you that think every episode of : >Sliders is great--although I have some good things to say about this : >episode, most of it is bad. : >S : >P : >O : >L : >E : >R : >A : >L : >E : >R : >T : >EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just : >thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. : >They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was : >behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and : >invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as : >it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we : >would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different : >size. : No, you didn't get it. It's not that the world revolved slower, but : that it revolved FASTER. Thus, because of relativity (of which I : admit I know almost nothing about), things happen on that world at a : rate slightly slower than they do on other worlds (I think...) Because you admit to know little about relativity, allow me to elaborate. The world was spinning (revolving) so much faster, that there was time dilation. HOWEVER, if this were the case, the earth would have had to have been rotating at this speed since it was created. But then the cumulative effects of time dilation come into play. After 4.5-5 billion years, the earth would have to have been rotating at approximately 21,910.27 meters/sec (4.5B +12yrs = 4.5B(1-v^2/c^2)^-1/2; if the equation is incorrect, then I'm certain that someone will correct me.) or about 0.00007% the speed of light. We currently travel at about 465.42 meters/sec ((2*Pi*Rav)/(24*60*60), Rav = 6400000 meters). After this, the math gets complicated. Another point to consider was thrown out right at the beginning. "That was a great slide." "Must have something to do with the gravity..." The acceleration of am object on the surface of a rotating body is always directed into the object. Mass has gravity, and the centripital acceleration due to an object spinning at that speed (21,910.27 m/s) would be approximately 75 m/s/s, which is about 7.5 times our current acceleration due to gravity (~9.8 m/s/s). If this has been the case throughout history, then the planet that we should have seen would have been a lot different, and out sliders would have had to go on massive diets (imagine weighing almost 8 times what you wiegh right now!). The explanation given above (Big Bang happened 12 years later) would have been much simpler to say (it has its own problems, but nothing on this for now). Another problem that I had with the episode was this: They were back on Earth Prime. Give or take a dozen years. EVERYTHING that had taken place in their history, had taken place there. (Well, maybe not, but they didn't investigate this too thoroughly). This episode was more like Quantum Leap than Sliders, having Quinn put right what once went wrong, and they got a few things right (decent acting, and the twist with the fight at the end (I didn't get that until Quinn didn't do anything about the bat), but the science was all wrong. (I don't know about the theory they mentioned, it might exist, but I'd never heard of it before then, and the physics doesn't work the way they played it out.) The ending would have had more meaning if one of two things had happened: 1) Change all the preceeding episodes so that no one ever sees them slide until Heather does. That would make the ending a little more special. Or, 2) Don't show her coming around the corner just in time. Have Quinn say something along the lines of "My name is Quinn Mallory", and then walk away from her. She's a teacher, she'd get it eventually, but she'd probably just stand there stunned until the sliders had left, and not see the wormhole. Well, I hope that covers it, and leaves you less confused than when you started. I'll go now, but with this one disclaimer. Any and all logic, mathematical, grammatical, and/or spelling errors are probably due to the fact that it's now 4:26am. Eric Bycer

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (bycer45@futures.wharton.upenn.edu)


Gregory Kam (aw267@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote: : Eric Bycer (bycer45@futures.wharton.upenn.edu) writes: : > : > Because you admit to know little about relativity, allow me to : > elaborate. The world was spinning (revolving) so much faster, that there : > [Physics mumbo-jumbo deleted -- after all, it's a TV show.] Hey, the person I was responding to said she didn't understand relativity. So I explained a little of it. : > The ending would have had more meaning if one of two things had happened: : > : > 1) Change all the preceeding episodes so that no one ever sees them slide : > until Heather does. That would make the ending a little more special. Or, : Nah. : : > 2) Don't show her coming around the corner just in time. Have Quinn say : > something along the lines of "My name is Quinn Mallory", and then walk : > away from her. She's a teacher, she'd get it eventually, but she'd : > probably just stand there stunned until the sliders had left, and not see : > the wormhole. : You really think so? So you mean if some adult came by, helped a little : kid while you were watching and then walked away saying that he's that : little kid's future self, you would piece all that stuff together?!? : Greg Greg, Don't forget how she was always commenting how he seemed to know so much about the future, and how everything he said came to pass, and how he reminded her of Quinn, and how he said that he had had similar experiences when he was Quinn's age, and there are a lot of other clues to help her figure it out. Especially if she came around the corner and he was gone... Eric Bycer

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (Chris Crosby <murph@haven.ios.com>)


GFung@unix.dsoe.com (Karen Fung) wrote: >EXCUSE ME!#1. I guess the writer of that episode decided to ignore >everything Brad Linaweaver wrote in the novel. The whole basis of the >episode was on the fact that Quinn's father died when he was 11, yet in the >book, Quinn's father lived to see Quinn get into Berkley. The Brad Linaweaver novel obviously followed a different group of Sliders! :> ==================================================================== Chris Crosby, Co-Publisher SCC Entertainment "The C Stands For Quality!" Come see the useful links, the weekly online comic strips, and the good natured wacky fun! Visit us on the Web at: http://members.aol.com/SCCENT ====================================================================

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - The Explanation, Because *Someone* Will Need It.... ("The Guardian" related) - (arphaxad@cyberspc.mb.ca)


GFung@unix.dsoe.com (Karen Fung) wrote: <snip> >EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just >thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. >They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was >behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and >invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as >it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we >would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different >size. <snip> I figured this episode would revolve around a high-concept explanation that would leave a few people scratching their heads. It took me about half an hour before I got down an explanation that even left *me* happy, let alone how y'all will feel about it. I'm not implying that Karen Fung is confused, but this is the closest thing to a critical quote of the concept that I found. First off, the problem with explaining it via The Big Bang is that a) if BB had happened even *1 second* later, the universe would be so different from ours that I doubt the Milky Way would exist, let alone Earth, so shifting it forward a full 12 years is out of the question, and b) even if you allow that the Earth would still be here, BB was the start of time, so then they would land on a world where it is *not* actually 1996, no matter what the calendars say, thus violating the main Sliders precept. However, the explanation that they actually used is both plausible and a *real* one that the writers did not make up themselves. (I often find in the Tracy Torm��� scripts alot of evidence that he has done his homework involving alternate-universe theories.) In this case, the same amount of *actual* time has passed--on Earth and after the BB, since Karen brought it up--but it is all a matter of perspective. I will exaggerate the difference to give a good example: "1984 World" spins just a little faster, making the day just a little shorter. A year is still a year, but time measurements at the level of seconds are affected. Just a little less is accomplished each day, to the point that by 1996, there is a twelve-year discrepancy. Because of this lapse, historical dates might be affected: Columbus landed in America in 1501, the Declaration of Independence was signed in April 1787, WWII lasted from 1951 to 1957, and JFK was shot in October of 1975. Most importantly, Quinn Mallory was born in 1985, so he is 11 in 1996 as opposed to 23. This was referred to at the top of the episode when they landed all stretched out, and Quinn said, "Must be something about this world's gravity." An Earth that spins slightly faster would also have a slightly higher gravity than ours, and this would be very likely to affect the sliding process--remember, Quinn discovered sliding by accident when he was trying to invent an *anti-gravity* device. That's my stab at a reasonable explanation of things. Of course, someone else will have to explain to me why a junior high in San Francisco would have *palm trees* planted all around it.... *sigh* (Why didn't they move filming to <gasp> San Francisco?) Edgar Governo

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - Re: The Explanation, Because *Someone* Will Need It.... ("The Guardian" related) - (Sam Deth <samdeth@neworld.net>)


Edgar Governo wrote: > Of course, > someone else will have to explain to me why a junior high in San > Francisco would have *palm trees* planted all around it.... *sigh* I found that beleivable. I grew up in the Bay Area, and there were palm tress around. My high school in Redwood City had some palm trees. So why not at a Jr. High in SF? They do have palm trees there. In any case, I find palm tree'd San Francisco more beleivable than snowy ones. Sam Deth Mulder-Scully 96 Trust No One Else

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (GFung@unix.dsoe.com)


Sam Deth <samdeth@neworld.net> wrote: > A lot of boys fantasize about their teachers. While I did not >fantasize about my 3rd grade teacher (she looked like Adoplh >Hitler...even hast the moustache), I have fantasized about other, more >attractive teachers, as I'm sure have many people here. He got to act on >a fantasy a lot of kids have . Besides, she was a bit of a babe ;). Well, I'm female. What would I know? I've never had a crush on Mr.Findlay. :) > Can you say sweeps week ploy? > It's an interesting subplot, and I assume they'll develop it. I wonder >what they'll do now that he has an "incurable", "inoperable","terminal" >disease. I didn't quite mean it wasn't a good move, just that an explanation might have helped. Oh well, I'd have to let 'em off for that one--after all, I don't think they know any illnesses from other dimensions. > Well, last season it was Wade, this season it's Quinn :). Well, here's hoping the fourth season (or at least some of 3rd) will have Wade *and* Quinn. Together. :) > you're welcome :) No no no, you're supposed to give me a weird look! :) Hi, I'm Karen Fung. Thanks for talking to me! gfung@unix.dsoe.com

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (aw267@FreeNet.Carleton.CA)


Eric Bycer (bycer45@futures.wharton.upenn.edu) writes: > > Because you admit to know little about relativity, allow me to > elaborate. The world was spinning (revolving) so much faster, that there > [Physics mumbo-jumbo deleted -- after all, it's a TV show.] > The ending would have had more meaning if one of two things had happened: > > 1) Change all the preceeding episodes so that no one ever sees them slide > until Heather does. That would make the ending a little more special. Or, Nah. > 2) Don't show her coming around the corner just in time. Have Quinn say > something along the lines of "My name is Quinn Mallory", and then walk > away from her. She's a teacher, she'd get it eventually, but she'd > probably just stand there stunned until the sliders had left, and not see > the wormhole. You really think so? So you mean if some adult came by, helped a little kid while you were watching and then walked away saying that he's that little kid's future self, you would piece all that stuff together?!? Greg

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (aw267@FreeNet.Carleton.CA)


Karen Fung (GFung@unix.dsoe.com) writes: > 'The Guardian', to me, was one episode full of "EXCUSE ME!"'s. I didn't Sorry, I don't buy any of them! > > S > P > O > L > E > R > > EXCUSE ME!#1. I guess the writer of that episode decided to ignore > everything Brad Linaweaver wrote in the novel. The whole basis of the > episode was on the fact that Quinn's father died when he was 11, yet in the > book, Quinn's father lived to see Quinn get into Berkley. And the thing > related to this might be that had Quinn's father died earlier, the series > premiere might have been different. Book? What book? *Don't read the book!* No one promised any continuity between the books/comics/TV shows. I really dislike it when people cross-compare plotlines/details from different sources (nothing personal to Karen). > EXCUSE ME!#2. It seems to me Quinn got a little too good at burying > feelings. I think I'd feel pretty weird when I learned I kissed myself > ('Double Cross'), and I would feel equally if not more weird if I was > *willingly* kissing my teacher. But Quinn just seems to push it down his > throat and get on with it. I'm not talking from expierience, of > course--I've never kissed *any* version of my teacher, past or present. I > just kind of think that scene with the teacher was *kind* of unnecessary. Someone else complained about this as well. Maybe it's a male-thing. I don't think there was anything wrong with Quinn "romancing" his homeroom teacher. I mean, it's not like they're related or anything. It's just one of those things where, when you were a kid, you wished you were a lot older so you could attract someone's attention. I can't recall any having any crushes on teachers as a kid, but I remember some summer camp counsellors that I had wished were younger! :-) So given the circumstances, that Quinn was now older, and his teacher a lot younger, I'd say "go for it!". She obviously showed interest in him. > EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just > thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. > They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was > behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and > invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as > it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we > would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different > size. Okay, I'm not going to try to explain this one. I was a little uncomfortable with the explanation at first, but after I saw the episode, I forgave them for their attempt at being scientifically-accurate. Sometimes the cause justifies the means. The story was, IMO, good enough that they just HAD to find some way to get them to "time-travel". Besides, no matter how you try to explain it, I don't think you can ever fully explain it. They are, after all, *sliding*. What laws of Physics do we have to justify *that*? It was such a good episode! No wild special effects, but a good story. True it has been done before, but this had enough to make it different from the rest. > something....we'll just make up some mumbo jumbo and make Rembrandt get > confused so that we won't have to explain it more than we have to." The > same probably went for Arturo's unnamed terminal illness. I liked the reference to Arturo's illness. It was just enough to tie in a thin sub-plot between episodes. I liked that, and also the reference to Logan. It shows that there IS some order and progression in the series. > This is just an obervation--it seems that almost every episode Quinn is > running off with some woman--Nicky in Rules, Logan in Double Cross, and now > Heather. I guess now if I had one question to ask the Sliders producers, > it won't be "Do you have any plans to get Quinn and Wade together?" > anymore. Gee, Jerry must have really meant it when he said he liked > make-out scenes. :) I think it's pretty equal -- well except for maybe Arturo, but he managed to meet some women in this last episode. Rembrandt and Wade also get their fill of romances, so I don't think it is imbalanced. Greg

1996-10-13 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (The White Rabbit <aevans@mail.orion.org>)


Karen Fung <GFung@unix.dsoe.com> wrote in article <32682504.10362544@news.cyberstore.ca>... > EXCUSE ME!#3. Well, this one little thing I found wrong might have just > thrown everything I thought about the writers' intelligence out the window. > They could have used the classic explanation for why the world was > behind--the Big Bang happened a little later. But they had to go and > invent an explanation of their own instead, one which eludes me as much as > it did Rembrandt. If the world revolves slower, I think that means we > would have a longer day, unless maybe the sun or the Earth was a different > size. > Here's my idea. If the world revolved just microscopically slower, then the life forms on that Earth would age, microscopically slower, meaning they would live microscopically longer lives, and have their children microscopically later in life. Eventually, all the microspocially longers add up, to a much longer, and boom, this Earth is behind us by years in their development. So it's not just because the rotation of the Earth is longer, its because of the longer rotaion that the life forms evloved SLIGHTLY differently in their cell reproduction. This is just my theory here. I can't prove or disprove it. Take it as you will. I hope it helps though. The White Rabbit

1996-10-14 00:00:00 - Re: The Explanation, Because *Someone* Will Need It.... ("The Guardian" related) - ("Walt Kawalec", III)


> arphaxad@cyberspc.mb.ca (Edgar Governo) writes: > I figured this episode would revolve around a high-concept explanation > that would leave a few people scratching their heads. It took me > about half an hour before I got down an explanation that even left > *me* happy, let alone how y'all will feel about it. > (snip) > > However, the explanation that they actually used is both plausible and > a *real* one that the writers did not make up themselves. (I often > find in the Tracy Torm��� scripts alot of evidence that he has done his > homework involving alternate-universe theories.) In this case, the > same amount of *actual* time has passed--on Earth and after the BB, > since Karen brought it up--but it is all a matter of perspective. I > will exaggerate the difference to give a good example: > > "1984 World" spins just a little faster, making the day just a little > shorter. A year is still a year, but time measurements at the level > of seconds are affected. Just a little less is accomplished each day, > to the point that by 1996, there is a twelve-year discrepancy. > Because of this lapse, historical dates might be affected: Columbus > landed in America in 1501, the Declaration of Independence was signed > in April 1787, WWII lasted from 1951 to 1957, and JFK was shot in > October of 1975. Most importantly, Quinn Mallory was born in 1985, so > he is 11 in 1996 as opposed to 23. This does not follow. The words "day", "year", "second", and so forth are nothing more than labels that we have put on intervals of time. The length of these intervals are essentially arbitrary. (Granted, they were originally based on observable natural events and mathematical concepts, but they are, in the present scientific sense of their meanings, still quite arbitrary.) For the premise to work (the Sliders are still in "1996", but the world is in "1984") there had to have been a change in the actual rate in the passage of time, rather than, as you have explained, the measurement of that passage. Something on the order of a difference in the physical structure of that universe (which would create all kinds of problems) or a difference in the acceleration of the objects on that Earth would be needed to accomplish this feat. Relativistic time dilation could accomplish this if the mass of the Earth was sufficiently larger, but it would take someone more knowledgeable in mathematics than me to know how much more mass it would take to "lose" 12 years in 4.5 billion as compared to "our" time. > This was referred to at the top of the episode when they landed all > stretched out, and Quinn said, "Must be something about this world's > gravity." An Earth that spins slightly faster would also have a > slightly higher gravity than ours, and this would be very likely to > affect the sliding process--remember, Quinn discovered sliding by > accident when he was trying to invent an *anti-gravity* device. The spin of an object has no correlation to its gravitational pull. The only things that affect the gravitational pull between two objects are their masses and their distance from each other. > That's my stab at a reasonable explanation of things. Of course, > someone else will have to explain to me why a junior high in San > Francisco would have *palm trees* planted all around it.... ************************************************************ * Walter F. Kawalec, III | "Common knowledge is often * * | too much of the former, & * * E-mail: wakst9@pitt.edu | not enough of the latter" * ************************************************************ * "Prejudice is foolish when you can hate people on merit" * ************************************************************ * "Failure to conform is usually more dispositive than * * adherence to custom" * ************************************************************

1996-10-14 00:00:00 - EXCUSE ME! - (Greg.Smith@accent.parasol.wierius.com)


Karen Fung wrote: > This is just an obervation--it seems that almost every episode Quinn is > running off with some woman--Nicky in Rules, Logan in Double Cross, and now > Heather. I guess now if I had one question to ask the Sliders producers, > it won't be "Do you have any plans to get Quinn and Wade together?" > anymore. Gee, Jerry must have really meant it when he said he liked > make-out scenes. :) I would have to agree with this. I would like to see Quinn and Wade together, mostly because that's how it was "set up" at the beginning, with Wade having a major crush on Quinn for quite some time. If they do NOT manage to become a couple, I would interpret that as meaning that with them spending so much time together that Wade has found Quinn LESS desirable, and that sorta pits one character against another as far as fan's support. I would've thought if anything they would have grown closer spending so much time together. I watch the show for the "fantasy" and/or "science fiction" aspects, and am NOT interested in the "romance" angle specifically. I do find it quite odd that with almost every slide, in the space of a few hours, days or weeks, at least one of the Sliders manages to fall in love, knowing FULL WELL that their time in that specific place is absolutely pre-defined. I wouldn't have any problem at all with a Quinn/Wade marriage, and in fact would welcome the idea, as it would put an end to the romance-of-the-week writing for those two characters, but I doubt that the writers are willing to give up such a fall-back, no matter how tired or lame it is. -- |Fidonet: Greg Smith 1:114/402 |Internet: Greg.Smith@accent.parasol.wierius.com | | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

1996-10-14 00:00:00 - Re: The Explanation, Because *Someone* Will Need It.... ("The Guardian" related) - (regnery@ix.netcom.com)


arphaxad@cyberspc.mb.ca (Edgar Governo) wrote: >"1984 World" spins just a little faster, making the day just a little >shorter. A year is still a year, but time measurements at the level >of seconds are affected. Just a little less is accomplished each day, >to the point that by 1996, there is a twelve-year discrepancy. >Because of this lapse, historical dates might be affected: Columbus >landed in America in 1501, the Declaration of Independence was signed >in April 1787, WWII lasted from 1951 to 1957, and JFK was shot in >October of 1975. Most importantly, Quinn Mallory was born in 1985, so >he is 11 in 1996 as opposed to 23. The difference would be a tiny fraction of a second per day. I doubt that the years would be different. If they were, the world would be substantially different. Presidential elections every four years, for instance. And timing would make a big difference in colonial periods: signing the Declaration in April instead of July would have a substantial impact. Could George Washington have crossed the Delaware on Christmas Eve and surprise the Hessian soldiers who were partying? With JFK being shot in a different month, there would have been more time until the next election, and would the campaigns have been substantially different. Seasons might not have have a big impact now, but in colonial times, lives revolved around the seasons and harvest, and changing the time line so events were happening in different seasons would result in substantially different outcomes. Hitler and Napolean invading Russia, for example. George M. Regnery | "The words "to make money" hold the essence of human regnery@ix.netcom.com | morality." -- Francisco D'Anconia (Atlas Shrugged) ----------------------+------------------------------------------------------ Links for Corporate Information: http://www.netcom.com/~regnery/corporate.html

1996-10-15 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (CHAD A SALVATORE <bn880@localnet.com>)


Sam Deth wrote: > I wonder > what they'll do now that he has an "incurable", >"inoperable","terminal" > disease. Thats an easy one... they will someday... close to the actual death of Arturo, slide into a world in which there is a cure for that disease and be done with it... Chad

1996-10-15 00:00:00 - Re: The Guardian --- didn't copy any movie! (I think) - (gharlane@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu)


Mostly deleted, but may still contain the vaguest whiff of a hint of a clue to a possible spoiler.... In <Dz6LF0.AEC@world.std.com> amniem@world.std.com writes: > ...<deletia> > Thoughts on The Guardian. An older version of yourself appears and tells > you not to read these spoilers: > > This episode didn't grab me on a science fiction level. But I think > every guy that ever skipped a grade can relate to the schoolyard > bullying. It made me recall a few bullies I hadn't thought about in > years. > ...<deletia> Going back in time and coaching yourself is an old, OLD idea in SF.... See "WHEN THE BOUGH BREAKS" by "Lewis Padgett," or the D.C. Fontana episode of the old "TREK" cartoon series where Spock goes back to teach himself the Vulcan Neck Pinch so his younger self can deal with bullies...... (more recently redone on ST:TNG as a script involving Worf's kid Alexander, for that matter) Ellison has used the concept in prose and script, and so did Serling. There's nothing new about the basic idea, in either written or dramatic SF, or Fantasy, for that matter. I'm pointedly ignoring the incredible scientific & technical incompetence of the script, which once again clearly demonstrates the writing staff's inability to cope with logic, rationality, or basic scientific concepts.

1996-10-15 00:00:00 - Re: The Explanation, Because *Someone* Will Need It.... ("The Guardian" related) - (gharlane@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu)


In <32616F4D.3F6D@neworld.net> samdeth@neworld.net writes: > > I found that beleivable. I grew up in the Bay Area, and there were > palm tress around. My high school in Redwood City had some palm trees. > So why not at a Jr. High in SF? They do have palm trees there. > In any case, I find palm tree'd San Francisco more beleivable than > snowy ones. > Since our current society/civilization exists in a fairly brief interglacial "warm" period, odds would support the assertion that most adjacent time lines would be COOLER than this one; the mechanism that governs the occurrence of ice ages is not clearly understood, but we do know that, in history, icy is more common than balmy. Snow in San Francisco was eminently acceptable, and should have been dealt with using one line of dialog, something like "Amazing how chilly it is in most San Franciscos we've visited...." It was the Canadian Accents, and Canadian Architecture, that made us nervous! .

1996-10-19 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (wilbur07@aol.com)


In article <53nkef$e35@netnews.upenn.edu>, bycer45@futures.wharton.upenn.edu (Eric Bycer) writes: >: No, you didn't get it. It's not that the world revolved slower, but >: that it revolved FASTER. Thus, because of relativity (of which I >: admit I know almost nothing about), things happen on that world at a >: rate slightly slower than they do on other worlds (I think...) > >Because you admit to know little about relativity, allow me to >elaborate. The world was spinning (revolving) so much faster, that there >was time dilation. There can't be any time difference due to relativity in this case because you are assuming that there is a fixed frame of reference such as Earth Prime which there really isn't, or so I gather from what I know about relativity . . . Mark Constantino

1996-10-19 00:00:00 - Re: EXCUSE ME! ('Guardian' spoilers') - (bycer45@futures.wharton.upenn.edu)


Wilbur07 (wilbur07@aol.com) wrote: : In article <53nkef$e35@netnews.upenn.edu>, : bycer45@futures.wharton.upenn.edu (Eric Bycer) writes: : > : >Because you admit to know little about relativity, allow me to : >elaborate. The world was spinning (revolving) so much faster, that there : >was time dilation. : There can't be any time difference due to relativity in this case because : you are assuming that there is a fixed frame of reference such as Earth : Prime which there really isn't, or so I gather from what I know about : relativity . . . : Mark Constantino Mark, Consider this. The world they slid into was revolving at its high velocity since its creation If not, then there are other problems, so let's make that assumption. Therefore, the world itself is an intertial frame of reference, compared to the fixed frame of reference of all the other worlds that they've slid into so far. That was the point that I was arguing from, given the explanation that Arturo gave in the episode. Eric Bycer