XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv   
   From: cpd@cat.pan.net   
      
   "Tim McGaughy"  wrote in message   
   news:ofKdnex0vYRyWi3WnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@posted.toastnet...   
   > catpandaddy wrote:   
   >>   
   >> "Tim McGaughy"  wrote in message   
   >> news:xdCdnTl-xIeipS3WnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@posted.toastnet...   
   >>> catpandaddy wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "Tim McGaughy"  wrote in message   
   >>>> news:y8-dneNMOOhy6zLWnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@posted.toastnet...   
   >>>>> catpandaddy wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> "jack"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>> news:ddd6b02c-791c-4da1-81b7-f6e1bd66b1e3@l25g2000yqd.goo   
   legroups.com...   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> From a plotline POV she can't reveal herself yet or otherwise it   
   >>>>>>> will   
   >>>>>>> be a very short and disastrous cylon war for the one cylon.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Does anyone remember how cylons' self-consciousness was activated in   
   >>>>>>> the old series?  The parallels here to the Terminator series are   
   >>>>>>> pretty close and I wonder which story of self-activating AI/robots   
   >>>>>>> turning into genocidal killers came first.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Easy enough to figure out.  1977 was the year of the first "modern"   
   >>>>>> sci-fi special effects films.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> 2001 was made in 77?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The "Space Odessey" film ushered in what I think of as the Renaissance   
   >>>> era of sci-fi special effects.  Although the film was groundbreaking,   
   >>>> SFX using motion-control cameras and optical printers was still almost   
   >>>> a decade away.   
   >>>   
   >>> Optical printers were in use long before 2001, and that film did in fact   
   >>> make use of them. The first optical printers were built in the 20's. For   
   >>> the math challenged, let me assure you that was roughly half a century   
   >>> before 1977.   
   >>   
   >> Fine, a fair grammar nit there.  The idea I had in mind was the combining   
   >> of computerized motion control with the optical printers.  More   
   >> importantly though, the word "Renaissance" was not meant in a bad way at   
   >> all.  I mean it in the "period of revival" sense; it woke everyone up.   
   >> Whether it's the first modern film or the father of the modern film era   
   >> which was to come, I'm fine with either assessment.  Modern is a strange   
   >> word anyway... the classic cars of the 1950s were "modern" at one time.   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> 2001 did not make use of COMPUTERIZED motion control, but large worm   
   >>> gears were custom-made for the express purpose of mechanically moving   
   >>> models in a precise repeatable fashion, in order to believably insert   
   >>> live action into model windows, do special lighting effects, etc.   
   >>   
   >> And I agree, it was absolutely groundbreaking.   
   >>   
   >> Here's how my choice of labels works from my point of view.   
   >>   
   >> - 2001:ASO single-handedly took the FX out of the dark ages and swung for   
   >> the fences with it.  I think of that as Renaissance of sorts.   
   >>   
   >> - The "dark ages" from my viewpoint might be represented by the old Flash   
   >> Gordon serials... ships lurching across a posterboard of the sky, no   
   >> compositing, everything done in-camera.   
   >   
   > In other words, cheap B movies.   
   >   
   > Try Metropolis, War of the Worlds, The Time Machine, King Kong... You   
   > know, the GOOD movies. You'll find that believable effects have been   
   > around considerably earlier than 77, and some of them were better than the   
   > bluescreen process we've all become familiar with.   
      
   Good enough!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)