www.ditl.org

I find myself watching youtube a lot these days. There are a lot of full length documentaries on there now, news and analysis, talk/podcast type shows, all sorts of things. Even full length films aren't uncommon.

Me too. That is how I got started recently on the TV show Scrubs.

Just imagine, someone dropped $200 on getting Battlefield Earth reviewed. Damn.

I wonder what Madoka Magica cost? $600?

Tyyr wrote:Just imagine, someone dropped $200 on getting Battlefield Earth reviewed. Damn.

Maybe it was Travolta?

Well the worst the movie the funnier the review usually. So if you want a funny review, Battle Field Earth is a good buy.

I wonder what he'd do with the Lost in Space remake. I remember it fondly, but mostly because of Lacey Chabert I think.

Or The Core.

Part 2 up and still looking good.

I'm just not feeling this one.

Might have to do with my insane hatred of time travel stories. I want scifi not period pieces.

The ability to travel through time isn't SF?

A lot of the time it isnt, its a natural event. Either way, the reason is only a small reason, then it goes to period time.

Teaos wrote:A lot of the time it isnt, its a natural event.

The continuous monodirectional version is. The hopping around all over the place certainly isn't. Regardless of what causes it, it's sci-fi.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Teaos wrote:A lot of the time it isnt, its a natural event.

The continuous monodirectional version is. The hopping around all over the place certainly isn't. Regardless of what causes it, it's sci-fi.

Indeed, we rarely refer to the natural forward progression of time as "time travel."

Naturally occurring, with no technology involved, is not especially scifi, its both fantasy and plot point X to start a wholly un scifi story.

It seems that you mean "naturally occurring" to mean not just free of technology but free of any influence which can alter the natural progression of time (innate abilities of some alien species, e.g.) I don't see how it can get more SF than that. TNG: "The Inner Light" was a story not about science-y stuff, but about personal discovery and development; Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, "The Minority Report," and Stranger in a Strange Land were stories of human ethos and the struggle for morality amidst conflicting climates; Neuromancer was a Shelley-esque story of a man's discovery of - and struggle with - the attempt at things greater than mankind's ken. Timeless themes, all; but every single one of them is a science-fiction story. The best sci-fi isn't about science fiction, it simply uses science fiction as a storytelling tool.

Part 3 up

Good review overall. I think Chuck's done the episode down a bit - I'd give it a six or a seven - but I can see where he's coming from regarding the lack of exploration of the details. I have a bit of an issue with his complaint about Guinan accepting Data's story of time travel without batting an eyelid. She's a member of an extraordinarily long-lived sapcefaring civilisation - given the propensity of Trek anomalies of the week to chuck people about all over history I'd be more surprised if she was dubious about the possibility.