Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:31:23 -0400
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Alternative reality v SF
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

At 10:22 AM 4/27/05 -0700, Drew Bittner wrote:
>--- "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com> wrote:

>My point here was that Voyage et al might be thought
>of as alternate history/reality because time has
>caught up with "now" in the shows I mentioned... not
>that they stem from a point in the past that turned
>out differently.

I don't think that we should recategorize stories just because the future
that they were about is now in our past, from a calendar standpoint anyway.
 They should be evaluated within the context of the time they were written in.

>> blank faced stare of that female lead on 1999 who apparently was
>> the lab test subject for botox or something and

>Barbara Bain-- ex-wife of Martin Landau (they were
<snip>
>I don't agree with your assessment.

That's fine.  I didn't watch a whole lot of Space:1999, and the fact that
her expressionless face staring into the camera is my most prominent memory
of the series may explain why that is.  That and the entire premise being
absurd enough to almost cause physical pain...

>>  With him it extended
>> to the voice too.  Maybe if you did a gene splice
>> between him and Shatner
>> you'd get an actor with normal levels of emotion?
>
>Ah, cloning is such a tricky beast...

Not cloning, genetic engineering.  I can easily think of more worthy uses
for such technology though.  We already have decent actors...those two just
aren't among them.

-- Mike B.
--
It takes a long time to understand nothing.