FLM films - My Webpage

1996-12-08 00:00:00 - I liked "State of the Art" - spoilers - (jboe@mailhost.efn.org)


Spoilers there might below. Dive at ye own risk. Aaaarrgh! 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Okay. "State of the Art". I liked it. I've seen some of the nits and such and, to be truthful, they had occurred to me while I was watching this episode. You know, the ones like: + Arriving on a world where there don't seem to be any people around but just blandly walking down the street, heedless of any possible life-threatening dangers + The professor is able to just patch up a complicated robot endowed with very artificial intelligence But I was willing to overlook these and other possible criticisms because: * We were treated to a more-or-less original concept for an alter- nate Earth; sophisticated robots had wiped out all human life (as far as known) on the planet. * We were treated to a guest star (Robert Englund) who played a very convincing semi-mad scientist. * We were treated to some good character development. The scene where Quinn and Rembrandt were in the room and Rembrandt moaned about not pulling his weight was another in what appears to be a series of scenes of character development. I wasn't too taken with the scene between the professor and Wade but I chalk that up to differences in individual taste. It is interesting that I noted that some who dub themselves "true fans" didn't care for this episode. Without rancor, criticism, or any sort of sarcasm, I would like to ask "Just what is it YOU are looking for in the show?" I will admit that that query was probably drastically grammatically incorrect but I will let it stand. I will not go off on the "true fan" tangent; I have ranted on that enough in a couple of recent followup posts. As for Sliders being pre-empted next week, well, the semi-clueless ones (They are starting to make some progress in my estimation of them; time alone will tell whether this continues. I'm sure they don't give a big whoop about that.) are entitled to make these sort of judgment calls as it is THEIR network. I'm sure that they felt that they have good reason to make this sort of scheduling change. A couple of things seem to have gone on hiatus for a while. One is the ratings thing for each episode. I don't think that I have seen it for the last couple of episodes. Maybe I have just missed or something. The other is Ed Hall's Sliders FAQ web page at http://www.brillig.com/sliders It hasn't been changed since November 1st. You okay out there, Ed?? Incidentally, this brings up a good question. On the episode list of the page under season three, you show "The Fire Within" and "Dead Man Sliding" as upcoming episodes. After that, the list goes all to hell. What's up with that? Can we expect to see ANY of these listed prospective episodes or is the whole thing invalid? Come on, Ed. We're counting on you. Well, I will leave now. Take care. James ----- "They don't want truth. It's not often obvious what the truth is. It can be complicated, and then not turn out to be what they want to hear. They want simplicity and certainty. People are never more ferocious than when their prejudices are being threatened. Then truth becomes the enemy and they'll die fighting it." -- _Paths_To_Otherwhere_ by James P. Hogan

1996-12-08 00:00:00 - I liked "State of the Art" - (xenofobe@mail.coos.or.us)


It is just a T.V. show and people will always find something wrong with it. But despite all of it's flaws I think that it is alot better then looking a ep. of Friends. The writers leave things out like the task of trading a watch or something that the grabed on there last trip to trade at a thrift store.

1996-12-09 00:00:00 - Re: I liked "State of the Art" - spoilers - (chesler@world.std.com)


In article <58fb58$i39@skarjeke.ind.mh.se>, James Boe <jboe@mailhost.efn.org> wrote: >Spoilers there might below. Dive at ye own risk. Aaaarrgh! > >20 > 19 > 18 > 17 > 16 > 15 > 14 > 13 > 12 > 11 > 10 > > 9 > 8 > 7 > 6 > 5 > 4 > 3 > 2 > 1 > > > > >Okay. "State of the Art". I liked it. I've seen some of the >nits and such and, to be truthful, they had occurred to me while >I was watching this episode. You know, the ones like: <Agreed,deleted> >But I was willing to overlook these and other possible criticisms >because: > * We were treated to a more-or-less original concept for an alter- > nate Earth; sophisticated robots had wiped out all human life > (as far as known) on the planet. It was good. It was well done. I don't know how original it was. Others have mentioned "Star Trek" and "Outer Limits" episodes, I though immediately of "Blade Runner". My biggest cheer for the episode is that while they're not doing alternative history (I agree with Gharlane, they need to hire Dr. Turtledove and do it right -- if done properly the show could be as truly educational as "Grammar Rock" or "We didn't Start the Fire") at least the writers are using to good advantage the device that the Sliders land in someplace completely different each week. > * We were treated to a guest star (Robert Englund) who played a > very convincing semi-mad scientist. Agreed. > * We were treated to some good character development. The scene > where Quinn and Rembrandt were in the room and Rembrandt moaned > about not pulling his weight was another in what appears to be > a series of scenes of character development. I wasn't too Character development good. "Let's use some dialog because otherwise we can't do exposition or character development" bad. >It is interesting that I noted that some who dub themselves "true >fans" didn't care for this episode. Without rancor, criticism, or >any sort of sarcasm, I would like to ask "Just what is it YOU are >looking for in the show?" Perhaps the set of fans is bimodal. >As for Sliders being pre-empted next week, well, the semi-clueless >ones (They are starting to make some progress in my estimation of >them; time alone will tell whether this continues. I'm sure they >don't give a big whoop about that.) are entitled to make these >sort of judgment calls as it is THEIR network. I'm sure that they >felt that they have good reason to make this sort of scheduling >change. Mid-December is always wierd for TV shows. >A couple of things seem to have gone on hiatus for a while. >One is the ratings thing for each episode. I don't think that >I have seen it for the last couple of episodes. Maybe I have That's because, as we learned in this episode, S.O.S. doesn't mean "Save Our Sliders", it means "Chipped beef on toast" (which really isn't all that bad if you like to start clogging your arteries early in the day.) -- David Chesler (chesler@world.std.net - ISP david.chesler@itcambridge.com - WORK david@absol.com - DURABLE ADDRESS) Gargoyles! Baby-portable scanners! Paddleball! Co-op City! Fast cars!

1996-12-10 00:00:00 - Re: I liked "State of the Art" - (allronix@ix.netcom.com)


In <MPLANET.32ab64b7xenofobe989681@news.coos.or.us> xenofobe@mail.coos.or.us (Scott Brown) writes: > >It is just a T.V. show and people will always find something wrong with >it. But despite all of it's flaws I think that it is alot better then >looking a ep. of Friends. The writers leave things out like the task of >trading a watch or something that the grabed on there last trip to trade >at a thrift store. Amen! Sliders is well-done writing (I started watching because I liked what Torme' had done in the past). As for the prof knowing a lot about subjects "unrelated" to his specialty - well, a cosmologist has to know a hell of a lot of physics to make the proper calculations about stars, planets, etc. Basic electronics comes in handy numerous places (home improvement for one). Things aren't as "compartmentalized" as some would like to think. The sciences bleed into one another, just as they also bleed into art. As for the episode, I found myself thinking about the Logan's Run TV seried (which I enjoyed a great deal). Englund was fabulous. It's hard to believe that it's the same guy behind both Freddy Krueger and Willie, the Visitor technician turned Resistance fighter. I alswo admired the use of the "opposites" dyads. Being somewhat new to the series, I haven't seen too much of the Quinn-Rembrant and Wade-Arturo dyads. Rembrant's bit about "not pulling his weight" was great, as was his comment about SOS. Derrik was a convincing, sympathetic character. I felt awful to see him get killed. The other androids paled in comparison. - Jessica - Jessica

1996-12-10 00:00:00 - Professor's wide knowledge - ("B. Boren" <brannonb@u.washington.edu>)


On 10 Dec 1996, Jessica Krucek wrote: > Sliders is well-done writing (I started watching because I liked > what Torme' had done in the past). As for the prof knowing a lot about > subjects "unrelated" to his specialty - well, a cosmologist has to know > a hell of a lot of physics to make the proper calculations about stars, > planets, etc. Basic electronics comes in handy numerous places (home > improvement for one). > Things aren't as "compartmentalized" as some would like to think. > The sciences bleed into one another, just as they also bleed into art. In my experience folks at the graduate level in Physics tend to be proficient in both computer programming and in electronics. Even in my non-calc undergrad physics series we had to learn circuit theory and do labs with electronics. The computer programs we used for calculating accellerations and such things in our labs were written by the physics grad studnts. For someone as broadly educated as Arturo seems to be, a little of everything isn't that odd. Most science is applicable across fields if you only have the intuition to see the relationship. Physics and Chemistry are how the body does its work, and thus are inherent to a thorough understanding of Biology. That's why you have to take physics (and sometimes calculus) to get into Med School - the sciences are extremely interrelated. As for people being able to handle more than one discipline, one of the students at the UW med school is a player for the Seattle Seahawks pro football team. Tell me you wouldn't say it was impossible if you saw a characer like that on a TV show ;) Just my take. Ben -- "When the odds are against him, and there's dangerous work, you bet your life, Speed Racer will see it through." BRANNON "BEN" BOREN ---- brannonb@u.washington.edu

1996-12-11 00:00:00 - Re: Professor's wide knowledge - (patrick@morgan.ucs.mun.ca)


B. Boren (brannonb@u.washington.edu) wrote: : On 10 Dec 1996, Jessica Krucek wrote: : > Sliders is well-done writing (I started watching because I liked : > what Torme' had done in the past). As for the prof knowing a lot about : > subjects "unrelated" to his specialty - well, a cosmologist has to know : > a hell of a lot of physics to make the proper calculations about stars, : > planets, etc. Basic electronics comes in handy numerous places (home : > improvement for one). : > Things aren't as "compartmentalized" as some would like to think. : > The sciences bleed into one another, just as they also bleed into art. : In my experience folks at the graduate level in Physics tend to : be proficient in both computer programming and in electronics. : Even in my non-calc undergrad physics series we had to learn : circuit theory and do labs with electronics. The computer : programs we used for calculating accellerations and such things : in our labs were written by the physics grad studnts. For someone : as broadly educated as Arturo seems to be, a little of everything : isn't that odd. Most science is applicable across fields if you : only have the intuition to see the relationship. Physics and : Chemistry are how the body does its work, and thus are inherent : to a thorough understanding of Biology. That's why you have to : take physics (and sometimes calculus) to get into Med School - : the sciences are extremely interrelated. I also find that Arturo's knowledge of various fields to be unsurprising, compared to some people. Since I have been at University I have taken biology, physics, chemistry, computers, math, statistics, philosophy, english, history, psychology, logic, etc. The thing about all those different disciplines is that a lot of them are interconnected and I imagine that someone of Arturo's intelligence and many years in the scientific community have given him, at least, a rudimentary knowledge of many fields and a grasp of the fundamentals for most of them. I have the same wide spectrum of knowledge but I doubt that I am anywhere in the field of the character of Arturo. patrick http://web.cs.mun.ca/~patrick I also have a Sarah McLachlan Home Page at http://web.cs.mun.ca/~patrick/sarah/sarah.html #=============================================================================# # patrick@mercury.cs.mun.ca => The Loner man runs WILD. # # # # Our program, who art in memory, HELLO by thy name, # # Forgive us our I/O errors as we forgive those whose logic circuits are # # faulty. # # Load us not into frustration,and deliver us from power surges. # # For thine is the algorithm, the application and the solution, # # looping forever and ever. RETURN.'" # #=============================================================================#