From: �Katherine J. Bennett� <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Contact
> I�m not sure if I missed out on the discussion of this
> movie or if there ever was one started but I do want to make
> a comment upon this movie. It was one of the best movies I
> have ever seen in my life time and I�m going out tomorrow
> and getting the book. If this movie was this wonderful I am
> hoping the book will be two times better as they usually
> are. Can anybody tell me if this book will offer as close
> to the awe and wonder as I saw in the movie and what else
> did everyone think upon watching this film.
I haven�t seen the movie, but I�ve read the book. Either it was poorly
translated, or it wasn�t worth, but I didn�t like it very much.
########################
From: LELA BUIS <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Hard SF and Rohan
>> Because the <glowing adjectived> SF writers are no
>> better at predicting future than any tarot reader, palm
>> scrutator or crystal ball gazer. But it isn�t his job:
>> tarot readers, palm scrutator and crystal ball gazers all
>> earn their living by telling customers everything will go
>> well; SF writers earn their living (when they do) by
>> extrapolating current trends and making their readers
>> think.
> Now, now. You left out the important adjective �hard�
> before the words �SF writers.� There�s something else going
> on here.
Huh? �Make Room, Make Room� is not exactly *hard* science fiction. At
least by Umberto�s definition.
Nicola
[log in to unmask]
Better have one bee than a host of flies. (Italian)
|