 | | Re: Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
|
|
(...) I haven't seen the movie (yet), so I hadn't been taking it into consideration. I'd consider it a bad trade, too - but then it wasn't me making the choice. To him, it may have been worth it (and I'll shut up now - at least until I see it). (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (don't bother)
|
|
(...) Just a side note: don't see the movie--it's awful. Well, not awful, exactly, but pretty darned uneven with not a single moment giving us any sense of what Robin Williams' character really has at stake. The short story is a much better (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (don't bother)
|
|
(...) c /Azimov/Asimov/ (getting the master's name right takes you up a notch on my "credence-o-meter" when discussing his work :-) ) I confess to a bit of shock at your perception. What a radically different perception than mine! As I said, I found (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
(...) Aagh! I've been revealed as a fraud! Actually, I was trying to maximize the Scrabble value of his name, and Z is worth more than S! Anyway, "the master?" Hmm... I can't quite get behind you on that one, I'm afraid, but I do enjoy his stuff. (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
Because of your description of this movie, I have made plans to go see it. Your "scathing" review has interested me in something I would have skipped, so thanks Dave!. It sounds typical of movies, to leave much of the story out, so should I read it (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
(...) The short story is among my favorites in any genre, so I recommend it whether you plan to see the film or not. I confess that I don't see how characterization that isn't in a film can affect the film, except by its absence, regardless of its (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
<FnIv3w.JtC@lugnet.com> <FnIvDJ.Kvp@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Of course, the short story *I* remember was called the "Sesquicentennial Man" (150 years). (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
(...) Was that its original title? I only came across it about 7 years ago, but I'm almost certain it was "Bicentennial Man" even then. Dave! (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
<386A85C4.716D28B3@n...scape.com> <FnJ57G.8vs@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, I don't know what decade I read it, but I do remember that the Asimov story I read was titled (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
(...) Interesting. I wonder if Asimov changed it because "bicentennial" became part of the U.S. popular consciousness in 1976. It would seem an easy thing to research... Dave! (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
<FnInFv.CHL@lugnet.com> <FnItEp.D5q@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Asimov is "the master" not because he's the best of all SF writers, (he's not) but because he was writing stuff that others (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
(...) Another extremely cool thing about him is that he was better educated than just about any SciFi writer out there, then or now, and as such was able to impart greater technical insight to his writing without sounding like he was trying to (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
|
|
<386B7C15.40D460AE@voyager.net> <FnKBD7.Ao9@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I've played with one, but never used one for anything serious. I did use a slide rule a few times in High (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
