johnc@dartvax.UUCP (John Cabell) (05/16/84)
I wasn't going to say anything about this movie,
but everyone else has said something. In fact, it
looks like everyone else has decided to put this
movie down.
I don't see why people thought it was such a bad
movie. I keep reading messages from people who say
this that or the other-thing was wrong. Why the
left hand, why water and not ice, why eat humans,
etc.
Why do people have to question? I watched the movie
because I wanted to see some entertainment, not because
I wanted to pick apart the science part of the SF.
If people want to pick apart the science part of the
movie, try explaining their spaceships and why they
didn't fall to the ground. They were close enough,
and they weren't visibly using any fuel to keep aloft.
Enough said, I think. Let's not start picking at
The Star Trek movies next :-).
--johnc
[decvax, linus, cornell, astrovax] !dartvax!johncbarry@ames-lm.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (05/17/84)
[No...get back...AAA{ (burp)]
Despite my extremely low opinion of "V" (the first one, not 'The
Final Battle', which I did not watch), I agree that a lot of
people are wasting time picking it apart. As one correspondent put it,
it's "shooting fish in a barrel". Too little thought went into it, to
justify spending much thought on criticizing it. While "The Game" (finding
the flaws in the science in science fiction) is an honorable tradition
in SF fandom, it is better played against a worthy opponent. For instance,
I heard Larry Niven once mention that he has received over 100 valid
complaints of flaws in the science in RINGWORLD, even though he did very
thorough homework before writing the book.
Even so, I submit that at least some of the postings on "V" (such
as mine :-)) have been more substantial, in that they point to truly serious
problems in the film (illogical plot, unbelievable characters, internal
inconsistancies, and generally slapdash filmmaking).
I suspect that the real message of all these put-downs of "V",
though, is positive. It expresses the disappointment of those like myself
who, at least briefly, had hoped that "V" would be better than the kind
of 'sci-fi' that TV usually offers. It shows that we are basically optimists,
and are hurt when we see trash, and know something worthwhile could have
been done on the same budget.
So, sure, it's OK to like "V". It's no worse than most TV drivel,
just a bigger disappointment. I confess that I, too, am capable of enjoying
real junk when it happens to tickle my fancy. But I'd still say it's
too bad that they didn't try a little harder, as I think that just a
little (?) more regard for logic and attention to detail could have resulted
in far more than what we got. And I think it's sad, as well, that the
high ratings received by something like "V" only confirm the writer's
and producer's low opinion of the taste and intelligence of the TV viewer,
and thereby encourage them to do more of the same.
Speaking of which, I gather there will be a "V" series this Fall.
Permit me to make you a small bet, John Cabell - before more than a few
episodes have been aired, I predict that you, too, will be ready to upchuck.
Kenn Barry
NASA-Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Avenue: {dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames-lm!barryron@brl-vgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (05/18/84)
Yes, in the foreward to A Hole in Space he says that anyone who has a first edition of Ringworld should hold on to it. It's the only one where the Earth revolves in the wrong direction. -Ron