Slashdot Mirror
Battlefield Earth
NOC_Monkey writes: "It looks like Warner Bros. is almost ready to release the Battlefield Earth movie. We've got John Travolta as Terl, Barry Pepper as Jonnie Tyler, Forest Whitaker as Ker, and Sabine Karsenti as Chrissy. It looks like they're going for release next month. I'm wondering how they're gonna fit a thousand-page novel into the framework of a feature-length movie." I could make the obligatory Scientology reference here, but I'm sure it'll happen in the comments.
That's big thing to jump out at me. This is definitely a big makeup-and-effects type of movie. In this month's issue of Science Fiction Age (the last one, btw - not the best SF mag out there, but it was dependable), Travolta described the film as "like Pulp Fiction in the year 3000." Right. As to how they're fitting the thousand page book into a single movie, they just filmed the first 500 pages for this, the next 500 will be made into a sequel. This assumes anybody actually goes to see the first one, of course.
When emmitt posts something that is just flamebait, somebody will take him up on it, so it might as well be me! =) Anybody who is wondering what $cientology is really about check out this site which is a decent look at how those people screw people over. It's disgusting really... and now they are making L. Ron's movies??? What's the world coming to?
-rt-
-rt-
** Evil Canadians are taking over the world. Learn about the conspiracy
Is this the movie where Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet get on the bow of the big star ship Craptanic and he says "I'm the king of the battlefield earth!"
and then a spaceburg rips a hole in the side of their starship and everyone dies and shit! - Something like that could maybe win best picture.
FluX
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
Hey, if you wanna know how it ends, please send $500000 to the Co$.
The 1000+ page novel was scripted into 2 parts. Apparently, WB feels fairly confident about Battlefield that the second has been given a go ahead.
Hmmm. Funny to see this here - recently ran across a ref to this on... don't recall, some site on memepool. Anyway, it linked to some former Scientologist's complete *rant* against the...religion/belief system/cult/whatever. But this (forgotten) site indicated that there may be a number of signifigant roadblocks preventing the release of this flick.
'Course, I've read on some sites how to construct the functional aluminum hat to keep the alien space-rays out, so....
Damn. Now I have research to do.
QA implies some kind of quality to begin with.
We were talking about this in my Science Fiction class. (because my teacher remembers when the *book* was getting hyped and promoted; he's still got some donated "limited edition" posters that were apparently being used as a tax shelter/deduction...)
Dude, I didn't expect John Travolta to be an alien! (the alien race is ST:TNG Klingons with straws up their noses? WTF?!??!)
All I can say is, if the movie looks as slick as the flash intro does, it should be pretty cool. We need more demostyle intros, even written in Flash, yeah! (and it didn't bug me about what platform I was running, which is good, since that isn't supposed to matter that much on the web, and browser id's are unreliable anyhow...)
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Battlefield Earth is one of *the* definative sci-fi novels; in my opinion, it is Elron's best work (apart from his sci-fi cult/religion scientology). As for how it will translate to the big screen... no book has ever made that transition without losing something.. there's just no easy, down and dirty way of showing the characters' thought processes on the big screen without resorting to lame narrative styles and such. I will say, however, that I have been waiting for this movie to be made ever since I closed the cover on my first read of that novel, and although I can't wholly approve of the way they've adapted the aliens to the big screen (I seem to remember a couple of extra arms that disappeared, not to mention the fur!), I will be one of the first in line to see this movie.
Hey, anyone who has balls big enough to start his own religion is okay in my book. Escapism is escapism, baby!
-Space
This looks like it could be a pretty decent movie, but I can't say that I've ever heard anything about it. Appears that it's based off a book according to the website. Anyone read it?
~Steve
--
"<r-xr-xr-x> Just try to edit me" -- www.ircnews.com
Travolta's a big-name Scientologist....
-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-
My mom's going to kick you in the face!
Man, I'm 23 now and have been waiting for this book to become a movie since the fourth grade. I'm going on opening day. I hope it kicks ass.
Are we supposed to start a flame-war over the merits of scientology? Why bother. The movie makes sense really, Scientology is more of a business with some pop psychology mixed in, than a religion. I mean compare it to Islam, Buddism, Christianity or Sikism, in each and everyone of those material wealth is a detriment. Not so in Scientology.
I personally am going to see the movie and take it for what it is. A science fiction flick designed to make $$$, not a religious experience.
and before some lame-brained moderator decides to ding me, i'm posting with my name because what i've said is a legitimate point, not ranting in the darkness.
. --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
Scientology is not a church, IT'S A FRICKIN' CULT!!! It's not just a moneymaking organisation, but a brain-washing, personality-destroying cult! By watching this movie YOU ARE SPONSORING A CULT.
Goddammit, this had to be said.
"Right about now, the geek soul brother, check it out now, the geek soul brother..." -- based upon Fatboy
I don't think it will be too difficult, actually. When I found out that there was going to be a movie I went back and read the book again (it's been about 10 years since I read it last). Several things were immediately apparent:
.6, we have a 270 page novel to adapt into a 2 hour movie.
1) Most of the last 500 pages or so of the book are entirely superfluous, as they deal with stuff after the "climactic event" (sounds dumb, but I'm trying to avoid spoilers) that simply has no business being in a film. It's a lot of "people" sitting around talking. So it's an adaptation of 500 pages into a 2 hour movie.
2) A significant portion of the first 500 pages is descriptive in nature. This will almost entirely translate to visuals. I'll be conservative, say 50 pages. So we're down to 450 pages into a 2 hour movie.
3) L Ron Hubbard (or whoever actually wrote this book) uses more words than he needs to. Period. If Heinlein had written this story (before he got old and started to ramble), it would have been 400 pages, tops, even including the extra crap at the end. Any decent writer who wasn't overly sensitive about being paid by the word, maybe 600 pages. So take the remaining 450 pages, multiply by
Bottom line: It is possible to adapt a 1000 page novel into a 2 hour movie. All you need is a 1000 page novel where 700 pages are extraneous and someone competent to do the adaptation. Of course, this doesn't mean the movie's going to be any good. (The story itself is pretty silly.) It's just not as unlikely as it initially seems.
www.xenu.net
Some of the stuff on there seems somewhat hyped *insert grian of salt*. However they do seem to cover the basics concerns many people have regarding CoS, including copyright enforcement.
"Some of my readers may wonder that I did not include my own serious subjects in this book. It was with no thoughts of dismissal of them. It was just that I put on my professional writers hat. I also did not want to give anybody the idea I was doing a press relations job for my other serious works"
Also remember that the scientology movement is exremely unpopular politically in many areas. Especially so over here in Europe where it is refused official recognition in countries such as Germany. Ask yourself if such a major company as Warner Brothers would pour huge budgets and promotional costs into such a film, if its content was guuranteed to cause controversy and drive away such potentially large audience areas?
Many years ago I spied a copy of Battlefield Earth on a friend's bookshelf. Curious, seeing all I knew about Hubbard was the scientology angle , abnd I had read a little about that movement I asked to borrow it with the intention of studying it for hidden meaning. I actually found it to be an interminally long, overlong extremely cheesy and dated space opera style sci-fi book.
I imagine that the Travolta connection is obviously no coincidence. But imagine this for a second ...
Perhaps , like me he read the novel because of the scientology connexion, but with a twist ... maybe he liked the book ?....
-- Oh Well
Read the book years ago, I actually enjoyed it immensely... intellectually not in the league of the work Herbert, Brin, etc. put out, but a fun read nonetheless. And I was surprised at how much I liked the movie trailer; after all the negative comments on AICN, I was expecting the worst. In fact, I was far more impressed by the Battlefield Earth trailer than the LoTR trailer, which just seemed like tripe to me. I suspect that 99% of the naysayers out there are just reacting to the Scientology aspect of the whole deal. Come on; the book contain not a single word referencing Scientology or its (bizarre) doctrines, and I don't think the movie will either. To all the anti-scienos: When's the last time you didn't go to a Tom Cruise movie just because he was a Scientologist?
First off, here is a link to the "true story behind the movie". It's the anti-scientologists thoughts on how the movie is a big advertisement and recruitment flick for scientology.(WHATEVER)
Personally, i don't care what beliefs are behind a movie. Religions, in my eyes, are just based on a bunch of metaphoric truths. In the Matrix, the whole trinity, rebirth hooplah was prominent, but it didn't make me want to goto church and praise god. I'm going to go see Battlefield Earth as a big budget scifi flick and hope to GOD that it's better than pitch black.
xavii aka bob
hmm.. a mirror can't be far off then.. never is when a celebrity has a straw up his/her nose. I'm sure it's just powdered sugar.. Really, I am.
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
Isn't it odd that the battlefieldearth.com site makes no mention of Scientology in L Ron Hubbard's Bio?
And isn't it weird that Travolta said at roughcut.com:
Interviewer: "Would you say your religious beliefs are influencing your creative work?"
Travolta: "Oh, no. I should make that very clear. In 1937, L. Ron Hubbard was a pulp, sci-fi fantasy writer. He financed Scientology and Dynamics through his writings. . . So, you're talking about a whole other area that has nothing to do with Scientology."
Sure John. Remember, Scientology is a dangerous cult. And no, I am not some crazed conspiracy theorist. Always read http://www.xenu.net/ if you need anti Scientology FAQs or info. Loomis
"The television is the retina of the mind's eye" - Videodrome
AAARRRGGGHH!!! John Travolta smokes poles too!!
Slave labor built tom cruise's hollywood resort!!
Tom Cruise smokes poles too! For the love of god man!
It was a children's book, stretched out, with some big words here and there, and then sold to adults.
I'm not saying I didn't enjoyed it, it's just too Harry Harrison for me. It was not surprising enough. (It was fun to read though...)
:)
And I shaln't make the obligarory reference to Scientology.
-oops-
I'm going to see this movie BUT I'm not gonna pay for it!.. :) .. I'll wait for a pirate DVD/VCD/VHS-tape... I'd propose you all do!.. Afterall what's the point with complaining about CoS and then giving them money to go on screwing peoples minds!? And the fact that it's a good book or that the the writer was a good such or even that it may be a great moovie is not an exuse to sponsor the CoS...
Thank you.
//Frisco
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." -Goethe
"Pick an A.C. sailor!.. We're cheaper than Karma Wh*res!" - A.C.
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
But apparently they had to change the entire look of the aliens and cover most of their bodies with clothing since the budget didn't allow for extravagant makeup that was needed.P.As for Scientology, well anyone who follows a "religion" dreamt up by an average sci-fi author is an idiot. Me, I'm holding out for a Discworld relgion...
Scientology makes no sense! Why would a "business mixed with pop culture" possess, undeniably, the worlds most advanced brainwashing techniques? What possible use could the have for their advanced indoctrination policys other then to twist the very SOUL! These are not people, these are not demons, they are nothing more then anal brain rapers. When was the last time you read any of there crap? Shit man don't you remember that infomercial they used to play..that was some heavy psychological bullshit. The sad thing is that some people actually BUY INTO IT! They squander all their money and their sanity so tom cruise(read polesmoker) can have his bullshit multimillion doller resort! Add insult upon insult...now hollywood thinks that this is what everyone in america should see???John travolta in his polesmoker outfit PREACHING?!?! the benefits of the way of scientology...more like the way of a certain Drug, syphilis addled satan fiend called
L RON HUBB- aww hell who needs to here that bastards name...
So what if L. Ron started his own religion, brainwashed hoards of people and make mad money off it? Who cares? That happens every day in the business world. Everyone loves to jump on the "Scientology sucks!" bandwagon, but let's not lose sight of the fact that 90% of EVERYTHING is crap. Whatever religious beliefs you may hold (or not hold), they probably suck just as much as Scientology. We've got a silly sci-fi flick coming out. Get some friends together, dig some popcorn money out from under you sofa cushions, and go kill a few hours.
Got Rhinos?
No no no....EVIL EVIL EVIL...L ron hubbard tried to father the ANTICHRIST!!!!!!!!!!!! He tried to conceive the child that would destroy the world!!!! Tell me what does that say about his character? Yeah he's a real fucking nice human being alright! Say again. He wanted to be the father of an ANTICHRIST!!!
" I'm wondering how they're gonna fit a thousand-page novel into the framework of a feature-length movie."
I always wondered how he managed to stretch this short story to a thousand pages :) and still keep the reader interested.
okay, point taken. I knew Travolta was in it, but I didn't know any other big name scientologists were. I definately don't want to help them at all. I'll have to give the whole thing some more thought.
maybe wait 'till it heads towards the $2 theatre.
anyway, I'm going to bed, I'll read the whole discussion thread in the morning.
btw- does anyone know where I can get my hands on some copyrighted scientology material to mirror? (the stuff that they're afraid to show anyone who hasn't been under their influence for years) (I heard they go nuts trying to keep that off the web)
I'll probably get my butt sued blue by the CoS, but hey I don't have any money anyway...
. --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
>>IT'S A FRICKIN' CULT!!!
Damn skippy! Oh yeah, L ron can eat a dick. Its people like him that make the world a shitty place.
a) lacks understanding of the basics of physics, chemistry and biology and
b) is a hopeless writer who has to ramfist his plot to its laborious and tedious conclusion with stereotyped characters and half-baked aliens (shark-like Selachee, who happen to be a race of bankers ho ho, rabbit-like Chatovarians, vampire-like Tolneps).
Want examples? Here they are:
Chemistry The evil race that enslaves Earth through superior technology (the Psychlos) have apparently discovered new elements in the periodic table, which vary from the existing ones in having electron rings at a different distance. Fact: Chemical properties are determined by the contents of the nucleus, the electron structure plays no role in this.
Physics The planet Psychlo is destroyed in the book by teleporting large quantities of banned nuclear weapons through using the Psychlo teleportation system. These cause the planet to implode inwards becoming a sun. Fact: Suns exist due to the intense heat and pressure caused by their gravity, which sustains a fusion reaction. Psychlo could not have been turned into a sun without somehow increasing its gravity a hundred-fold.
Biology During the story when one of the Pyschlos fall ill, it is revealed that they consist entirely of viruses and their medicine constists of anti-viruses. Fact: Viruses can only reproduce by implanting their DNA into cells, and therefore cannot exist on their own.
It is highly unlikely that any film could save this book from its own mediocrity. However, the book seems polished and professional compared to the tape Battlefield Earth (Hubbard's onslaught on the music world, intended to accompany the book). The high point of this is the first track, The Golden Age of Science Fiction, whose lyrics include the immortal words:
Buck Rogers! Buck Rogers! Buck Rogers! Yaaaaaaaayyyyy!
I once, long ago, remember picking up this book in a library and taking it home to read. Ten pages into it, I put it down in disgust, and since then I have never ventured into the truly dire world of Hubbard's books. And there aren't many books I can say that about. If the film is anything like the book it will be yet another shallow, pretty film in the vein of Armageddon.
And as for the people claiming this will be the worst kind of scientologist propaganda, well, remember - it's a film. And considering the genre of the film, the people who watch it aren't going to be looking for any kind of message in it - most people will forget the entire film within the week.
Any blatently obvious propaganda will be noticed and decried by the media, and any subtle indoctrination will probably fly over the top of the average film-goer looking for another action flick.
No, I think the greatest danger this film poses is that of dislocating your jaw after yawning through the entire film.
For the obligatory scientology refernce, see The Road To Xenu, a narrative account of life in scientology.
The Co$ will bulk buy tickets to inflate the take of this film, just like they do with copies of Dianetics and other Hubbard erm... "output"
Kenneth Robinson, ex-British Minister of Health:
"The government is satisfied that Scientology is socially harmful. It alienates
members of families from each other and attributes squalid and disgraceful
motives to all who oppose it; its authoritarian principles and practice are a
potential menace to the personality and well being of those so deluded as to
become followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health
of those who submit to them... There is no power under existing law to prohibit
the practice of Scientology; but the government has concluded that it is so
objectionable that it would be right to take all steps within its power to curb its
growth."
The CoS Is nothing more then a bunch of cowards! they prey on the weak minded and take everything..money, free will, property..you name it they plunder it. Now they have a chance to reach the "Mainstream" And they are taking that too! remember they have very advanced, subtle, brainwashing techniques..they have access to a large budget motion picture. what are they going to put in it? hmm let me think
Well, this is not the forum to discuss religion, nor to discuss Islam, however, I have to disagree with you on wealth being a detriment in Islam.
It is more of a social responsibility, and like many things in life (technology, speech, ...etc.), used correctly, can be a blessing. Misuse it (as often is the case) and it becomes a curse.
Wealth in Islam on the Muslim Investor web site .
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
Thank you.
//Frisco
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." -Goethe
"Pick an A.C. sailor!.. We're cheaper than Karma Wh*res!" - A.C.
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
They could have chosen the "Invasion Earth" series of books. Thinking it may be as fun to read as "Battlefield Earth" was, I attempted to read that series. My advice to anyone considering doing the same is to cut off your own head first. I made it through book seven of ten out of pure determination. I now have recurring nightmares, an irritating twitch in my left eye, incessant flatulation, and I'll never play the piano again. I'm glad my wife is so understanding (she read the foreward), but my dog will not come near me. BT
This is a page documenting the media coverage of BE.
http://www.geocities.com/xenu2000/
And!... The orbit height of the electrons within an atom vary too! As far as I remember light, among others, is emmited when an "exited electron" (an electron with higher energy than normaly) falls down to its normal orbitlevel (height)... So Hubbards point still makes no sense..
</MORE OT RANTING>
Thank you.
//Frisco
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." -Goethe
"Pick an A.C. sailor!.. We're cheaper than Karma Wh*res!" - A.C.
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
Suddenly "everyone" (90%) is opposed to free speech, and people like Scientologists should go get themselves buried under 6 feet dirt. It doesn't seem like you people have thought very much about your attitudes, you're just borrowing opinions from others closely matching what you feel. This makes for very hypocritical thinking.
Maybe I'll go see the movie when it comes around over here, in about 6-8 months I guess. If it's any good, maybe I should join CoS? I mean, I'm sure I'll be so indoctrinated and enslaved at the end of the 1000-page film, I just gotta part with all my money just to join a very questionable New Age cult.
No I prefer my own thoughts and my own "religion". Instead of adopting others' opinion and throwing away everything related to something "bad", it's better to adopt the core of truth in all. Going to war against everything you don't agree with isn't at all constructive. You don't convince anybody by yelling, kicking, screaming and killing. Not that I'm doing so much better than the rest of humanity mind you.
- Steeltoe
What do you do to limit yourself today?
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
another suggestion is pirating it on the internet..I like that way the best,dont have to leave the house..though not the best quality ;)
Thats right Everyone should pirate this movie..ITs a classic case of the good of intellectual property piracy! Lron AND Warner Bros suck ass... come to think of it so does disney
How L Ron's head is doing?
I hear its staying cool. If anyone ever finds a way to unfreeze and reattach it, he is going to feel embarrassed when he finds out Disney's frozen body was only a rumor.
I can't write any more as I'm off to take a free IQ test.
I joined up with scientology and spent a total of about 6 hours in classes, and one auditing session.
... gibberish.
I wanted to learn brainwashing techniques.
What I came away with was that their single most effective technique is that of introducing their own terminology. Couple this with the dogma that you have to understand every single word you read, and you are forced to spend all your brainpower trying to pick the intended meaning out of the gibberish, leaving nothing left to realize that it's
For all their talk of "if you read a word you don't understand, look it up", Elron doesn't have a very good command of the english language. He uses words incorrectly very frequently. Like idiots who try to sound intelligent by using big words.
The number one reason I didn't get involved was because it's all a bunch of mystical bullshit. The number two reason, though, was that in spite of this philosophy that supposedly gives you complete control over your life, there seemed to be a lot of fat, chain smoking losers in the group. This aside from the rumors that they keep a dossier on anything you reveal in an auditing session.
I once saw a video describing Disney's training process for people who work the parks. It uses a similar brainwashing technique. You aren't an employee, you're a cast member; they aren't customers, they're guest. I plan on using this technique when I form my own cult.
BTW, I'd recommend ever getting on their mailing list. I get one or two pieces of junk mail a month from them, and I only set foot in their building about four times, about three years ago.
--Kevin
Chemical properties - describe the way a substance may change or "react" to form other substances. (taken verbatim from my Chem 103 course text book).
Therefore chemical changes occur when chemical combine to create new chemicals. Since chemicals combine at the electron level, that is, covalent and ionic bonding of the electrons in the outer most electron shell, the Chem 101 Anonymous Coward is correct.
To a degree.
The number of electrons in the electron cloud of an atom is a one-on-one match with the number of protons in the nucleus. Even when that atom loses/gains electrons to complete shells, the atom has the same *chemical* properties (because charge is a *physical* property). Therefore, the nucleus of the atom defines the electron structure of an atom, and thus determines the chemical properties of an atom.
However, this garbage about the electrons being closer to the nucleus is a load of huey. First off, due to Heisenburg's uncertainity principle, we can never know the exact position of an electron. Therefore, our electrons cannot even be proven to be closer than their electrons, even *if* this was possible. This can't be possible, anyways, the four basic forces in the universe (weak, strong, gravitation, and electrical) are based on universal constants. Yes, universal meaning "the same everywhere", even Kansas. Since the atomic structure, both in the nucleus and in the electron structure, is built on these four basic forces, which are based on universal constants, the atomic structure is the same everywhere.
Lastly, even if our elements had closer electrons, the main method to classify elements is by atomic mass. The distance of the electrons to the nucleus does not affect the over-all mass of the atom, so there would be no creation of *new* elements because of closer electrons - they would just be the same elements as the ones we have always known and loved.
So, the author is still chemically inept, and I have lost about 30 minutes of sleep beating this dead horse.
Completely on-topic here, but the movie does look interesting, and I do intend to see it, even if the author failed Chem 103. Why? Because, I like the glitz and the FX of the movie. If I want plot and character development, I'll read a book or watch Babylon 5.
"Don't mind me cutting myself on Occam's Razor"
I'm afraid that you are very much mistaken.
The original Dianetics article was published in the May 1950 issue of Astounding Science Fiction (John W. Campbell was also into this kind of thing). The book seems to have originally been published in 1951 according to the Library of Congress.
Battlefield Earth on the other hand was published in 1982 (1984 paperback) long after L Ron Hubbard had started the Scientologists I'm afraid. Battlefield Earth was published after L. Ron Hubbard had not been seen by non-scientologists for several years and was supposed to prove he was still alive. The interesting fact is that he then started to publish the 10 volume series "Invaders Plan". The Scientologists then announced in 1986 that he had died when only about half the books had been published (but the rest were already written - honest).
A sub-plot of the 1981 movie "The First Monday in October" about hiding the death of the CEO of a large company could be based upon the rumours about L. Ron Hubbard at the time.
Gamma Testing - Where testing is extended to the full user community (AKA Shipping the Program)
I've read both L. Ron's Sci-Fi, and Dianetics (the background material/theory that Scientology is based on) and found them to be two completely distinct worlds of output.
Battlefield Earth, the Mission Earth books, Fear, etc, have nothing whatsoever to do with his psychology texts. And at that, are very good works. Stephen King is _extremely_ complimentary of Fear, if anyone would like a quick introduction to his fiction, that would be a decent place to start. I'm excited for BF Earth, and loved the last 500 pages, it's that "after the climax" story that I often put down a book wishing I had. Sure, imagination is a wonderful thing..buut.
And please, lets all remember he's dead. Scientology has changed a great deal from when he wrote Dianetics. There is a very different group of suits involved in the decision making now. (i'd imagine)
Also, this movie covers the first half of the book, so that somewhat changes the ratio of extraneous pages to necessary pages.
Again, i'm looking forward to it.
"In the end, we all fall back on fiction." -- Lonely Planet
You have nothing to fear, my son! You are a Latent Appliance Fetishist, it appears to me...
Gimme dat, gimme dat, cyyyyboorg....
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." - Alexander Hamilton
Since the electrons account for the size of atoms/ions, electron rings would mean "flat" atoms...that would sure look weird.
By the way: Orbitals are not circular trajectories of "flying" electrons. They are are visual model for 90% probability of finding the electron(s) somewhere in there. The Niels Bohr model of orbiting electrons has been proven wrong.
________________________________
If encryption is outlawed, only
________________________________
If encryption is outlawed, only
YIE565$FF DSDNE4!MJK XMY7*fRBVM.
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0185183.
Karma!
__
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
The book was GREAT FUN! When I was in the 5th grade, I read this book and was introduced to a whole new world (Science Fiction)...Sure it's a total space opera, but boy, what a fabulous space opera.
Without this book I might have discovered Heinlein, or Asimov, or all of the hundreds of others out there. I for one will be going to see the movie (it cannot be worse than Starship Troopers and I gave my 7 bucks for that one!).
I'm not going because I'm a big fan of the Scientology...I couldn't care less what hobbies LRH happened to have (hey, starting a cult, collecting stamps, surfing for internet porn...what difference does it make? He never hurt anyone...all members joined voluntarily).
And that's all I have to say about that.
You can (should) be against sicentology but I don't think this film has anything to do with this pseudo-religion.
I found the books quite funny, and IMHO "Mission Earth" is funny as hell and really worth reading!
You confess that you have never read more than 10 pages of the books or anything Ron Hubbard, then how can you criticise the books?
On the other hand, a film based on Ron Hubbard's books featuring Travolta (who is an active member of scientology), was probably financed by scientology and will for sure bring many to the sect.
So I will probably not see it even if I enjoyed the books...
Anyway, I don't know of any good SF book that made a great movie in the last 20 years...(except the Matrix ;-)
Holliwood has a gift to remove all the interresting bits of a SF story to make it a dull action-movie...
"Independence Day" anyone?
The movie will be crap, there are good reasons to boycott anything that will bring money to scientology, so I totally agree about not going to the movie.
But the books are good!
Black holes occur when God divides by zero.
Don't give a dime to the bastards.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
You can (should) be against sicentology but I don't think this film has anything to do with this pseudo-religion.
No I don't either, but even if it is I don't think it will matter, that was the point I was trying to make.
You confess that you have never read more than 10 pages of the books or anything Ron Hubbard, then how can you criticise the books?
Okay, that was a slight under-exaggeration. I did *try* and get into it, after all some books do just start poorly, but the terrible prose and childish concept really put me off. I'm an avid SF fan, but I prefer more hard SF where there are interesting concepts a plenty, but based on solid physical foundations e.g. Stephen Baxter.
Anyway, I don't know of any good SF book that made a great movie in the last 20 years...(except the Matrix ;-) Holliwood has a gift to remove all the interresting bits of a SF story to make it a dull action-movie...
Contact was OK, not nearly as good as the book of course, but not too butchered for a Hollywood film. Same with Sphere. Apart from that I can't think of any really. As an aside have you seen Cube? Now there is a truly intersting film.
And as you can guess, I'm not going to see the film :)
I downloaded the trailer the other night. This movie's going to suck sweaty donkey balls.
First of all, I think John Travolta's a fine actor, but horrible miscast here. He doesn't have the menacing presence of an alien leader, and his voice just... it just doesn't work here. And the crazystraws coming out of his nose just don't make him intimidating enough.
Story... okay, how many of these "humans have been enslaved" stories do we have to endure? I don't care if it was the first book ever to run with that idea, I'm sick of seeing it, and if it doesn't bring something new to the table, I'm skipping it.
Dialogue. "After we finish mining out this miserable little planet... let's do the universe a favor! Let's exterminate the lot of them!" Oh boy. Marvel comics can come up with better cliched villain talk than this.
Special effects? Incredibly fake. See the alien chick's tongue? No motion blur. Some of the flying ships look like they were rendered on a Voodoo3 card, with the settings on "fast."
And oh man. John Travolta doing the maniacal villain laughter...
Oh,... whats wrong with the old fashioned way of putting nukes in volcanoes? Of course you would have to deal with those pesking thetans afterwards, but what the hey!
All opinions are my own - until criticized
I gather that Germany ban everything scientologic, because of some law against organizations aiming at world domination (Linux? :) ).
Then, would (could?) the German government ban the film to block revenues to Travolta, Hubbard and other Scientologists?
__
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
Ok. I wasn't going to comment, and I know this is off topic, but you thought Sphere was a good movie?!?!
sigs are a waste of space
Hmm...i'm inclined to think that alot of people don't understand the COS, and so believe that maybe its just misunderstood. Personally i've never really heard of the COS before (well, i've heard their name 1 or 2 times, nothing else). Does anyone have any actual proof of what they do and who they are? And some bitch ranting about how evil it is and posting "supposed" facts won't cut it. From the tone of the page i looked at it seemed that she was blind with hate for them for whatever reason...i'd like just facts, not peoples opinions.
Whatever happened to the internet that wasn't hostile to anyone?
:)
That went away when people starting using it
But I have seen sphere! Crap!!! It was a remake of "Forbidden planet" with nice FX and without the interresting bits of the original story...
Black holes occur when God divides by zero.
>>I found the books quite funny, and IMHO "Mission Earth" is funny as hell and really worth reading! You confess that you have never read more than 10 pages of the books or anything Ron Hubbard, then how can you criticise the books?<<
I have gotten as far as 3/4 through Heinlein's "the cat who walks through walls" and dropped it. I have not to this day picked up another of his books. The same goes for Dean Koontz's "Dragon's Tears" .. It sucked, and it tainted my view of the authors.
First impressions matter, and this fellow got a first impression of Hubbard. Personally, I find it funny that he won his bet to start a believable religion. THAT makes him a good writer.
Lowmag.net
John Travolta, cult aside, has long overstayed his welcome. I'm sick of him and his stupid hand-flicking gestures (half borrowed from Andrew Dice Clay, half from Nicolas Cage), his squinty eyes, his rubber-lipped inarticulation, the lifts in his shoes.
John: please leave now.
Wordnik, a dictionary project which aims to collect
They should have made a Mission Earth movie(s)....it was much better than B.E. and satire is almost always a good translation to film. I read B.E. way back in 7th grade...I found it fun, but the writing in and of itself seemed wrong...almost like someone my age (at the time) was trying to write a SF novel... As far as Scientlogy goes...it's a pseudo-religion and should be treated as such...I am not going to boycott it, just like I didn't boycott Coca Cola back during the aparthied (sp?)issue in South Africa (and, honestly, how many of you did?)
He keeps writin' books even though he's dead,
L. Ron Ron Ron, L.L. Ron Ron!
. We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines, you know that ain't allowed - Talking Heads, "Life During Wartime"
I read the book when it came out in the early/mid 80s in paperback and had a bold "Soon to be a major motion picture" notice on it.
Like Dianetics, both were long and dragged on, repeating the same information over and over as if the author was getting paid by the word.
The bottom line? The book could have been a novella and had more impact. It did teach me a valid lesson, though, and that is if a book is getting nowhere, don't feel obliged to finish it.
Now, what I can't understand is with such long and content-free books as these, why did a religion start from the Dianetics book? The whole thing could be detailed in 50 pages at the most, and really didn't say anything. Comparing it to any other pop-psyc. or philosophy books, it comes up short. Comparing it to more serious texts, is not even worth it.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Cinescape had an interview with John Travolta, one of the producers of Battlefield Earth. He states that the movie would have been made much earlier if they could write a script that matched the overall feel of the book. They finally decided to take the book, split it in half, clean it up a little, and basically have an instant sequel if it does well.
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." - Voltaire
In an astonishing twist, Warner Bros. is releasing a movie based on a sci-fi book. In just a few weeks, we'll post a review so we can have a more informed discussion.
Oh yeah. Film at 11:00...
--
Some people have a way with words, and some people, um, thingy.
I've been reading science fiction for almost 20 years. Battlefield Earth and Mission Earth are among my favorite books. I haven't read any of Hubbard's other SF so I can't comment on that. I don't know much about Dianetics/Scientology and don't want to.
Two great parts about Battlefield Earth: Psychlo culture - what a bizarre race! I loved all the politics at the base. Another part of the book I liked was the interplanetary politics at the end.
Mission Earth was even better. I've read it twice (skipping most of the lurid sexual stuff the second time through). I think this is great satire, but have found few people who liked (or even tried reading) the series. Soltan Gris is such a pathetic creature - I can't help laughing as I read his narrative. I loved all the technology and the adventures of Heller on earth. I simply let pass the things that sounded like Scientology screeds.
I'll probably rent the movie someday even though I know it will suck. (You can't fit a thousand pages into a 2-3 hour flick.)
No, he is right. Electrons do not determine elemental uniqueness; take, as an example, any ion. In fact, it is the proton number that defines periodicity.
I actually got to go to an effects shop in Montreal where they were making the giant sized tools/weapons/backpacks for use in this movie. It was pretty cool, all old-school handmade construction.
... because he sucks :-) Him and his freaky wife.
And yeah, I AM against any "religion" which emphasizes wealth over spirituality. In the end you're worshipping yourself.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
As has been explained, that was not the claim. Of course that nuclei determine what element an atom is. But that's different to saying that its chemicals are determined by their nuclei. Chemical properties are determined by the outermost electron shell, and nothing else.
I stand corrected. I read the reply to the author but missed his comment. However, you are not entirely correct about the "outer" electrons exclusively contributing to chemical properties. This claim is naive. Electron transfer is chemical reaction, true. But chemical *properties* can include many weaker interactions like shielding, van Der Waals forces, hydrogen bonding, steric effects, etc. and not to mention stronger nearly classically ionic occurences like proton transfer. Since we were on the topic...
I like a good bit of politics in my SF - have you read the Gap series by Stephen Donaldson, or the Night's Dawn trilogy by Peter F Hamilton? As for aliens I've found some of the aliens in Stephen Baxter's Xeelee sequence to be fascination - the Qax, the Spline and the Xeelee themselves. For truly bizzare and interesting life forms, hard SF excels IMHO.
Who are you? I love your posts, they make me laugh. Thanks.
http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/he lena/ho_racle.html
Nothing is ever proven. Atoms are not real. They are human creations, metaphors. Just mathematical constructs that approximately follow nature. The Bohr model just not as good as the current model which supplanted it. Other models may supplant our current model one day. Food for thought, no?
If you want to learn more about brainwashing...check out some of the Usenet newsgroups on either recovery, support, or religion.
Here are the tips that I remember off hand on how to be resistant to brainwashing; 1. In general, be neutral and passive toward the cult/group's doctrine (special words in odd contexts). 2. Do not allow others to dictate your time and who you associate with. 3. Get a normal diet - don't let others decide when/where/what you eat. 4. Get sleep. 5. Keep in mind that smart people are more likely to be dragged into cults -- and you are not special in how well you can avoid this. 6. Leave when you've had enough.
There are other tips, but in general, avoiding stress, personal involvement, and repeated listening to the cult/group's message will help. (An aside: The stresses involved in being a parent are similar to what cults force upon people.)
One set of groups to pay special attention to is alt.atheism.*, because the locals are no-bs, logical folks, who tend to deal with the mess left over by former cult members. A few were in cults, but most are just run-of-the-mill atheists.
Ask for references on cult behavior and brainwashing, or just do a search on deja.com.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Everybody, EVERYBODY, is vulnerable in some way to cult indoctrination. A common tactic is to use an innocent front organization to generate initial interest. Eventually, the inductee is led further into the cult and away from sanity. Most cults have a very narrow front organization. The "Church" of Scientology has branched out into dozens, if not hundreds of organizations, each with a narrow focus, each feeding fresh recruits to the parent organization. Examples:
Alanon: For recovering alcoholics
Narcanon: For recovering drug addicts
Writers of the Future: for budding SF writers
even the Cult Awareness Network: supposedly aimed at deprogramming members of other cults!
You are dead wrong if you look at the COS' more extreme BS and tell yourself that you will never fall for it. You are only supposed to see that stuff once you have been "primed" with more palatable philosophy. I wouldn't be surprised if they are rolling their own Linux distro, just to rope in the Slashdotters =).
In all seriousness, motion pictures have widespread public penetration and influence. They are an ideal platform for the widespread dissemination of the cult's philosophy. The good news is that, after being hammered on the internet for years, membership in Scientology is way down. Battlefield Earth may be a last ditch effort.
Please DONT'T see this film, and DON'T pirate it. Just ignore it, and quietly cheer when it tanks at the boxoffice.
I find it funny that he won his bet to start a believable religion. THAT makes him a good writer
errr..... and shakespear spent all his time in a casino.
You will need the following:
Combine ingredients with an assortment of average people dissatisfied with their average lives, and shake.
Oh, yeah, and a catchy name (like, oh, "Scientology") doesn't hurt.
-- WhiskeyJack
Okay, the facts are they sue people left and right who say anything desparaging about them. That's bad enough for me, before you get into the kidnapping and other things. Just check out alt.scientology and they'll be happy to provide plenty of factual evidence (newspaper reports, court records). It's tough to not give an opinion when you see something so clearly evil, though...
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I've tried reading several of his pre- and
co- Scientology scifi books. Most didn't hold
my interest, except this one.
I fear it is too meladramatic to make a decent movie.
It looks like they're going for release next month. I'm wondering how they're gonna fit a thousand-page novel into the framework of a feature-length movie.
Answer: They aren't. It has been reported on numerous sites that the movie is only going to cover the first third or so of the book. Presumably, they see potential for a franchise here.
Whatever happened to freedom of religion? For a bunch of people who continually rant about free {software|speech|etc} you seem to me incredibly intolerant.
Why whould you care what someone else beleives, or spends their money on? If someone worships goats or something why would I care?
Religion, like software and OS's, is a personal choice.
And hey, my Mom and Dad give 15% of thier annual income to the Catholic Church - they must be brainwashed!!! OhMyGod - call the deprogrammers!!!
Travolta was shopping around for a production company last year and I was in Culver City. I opened the door to the hallway from the office I was in (formerly a soundstage) and there was John Travolta wandering over to the neighboring production studio trying to pitch his movie. In the three feet he crossed while I looked at him, numerous emotions rippled across his face. Honestly, it looked like the guy was severely mentally unstable AND possessed by multiple malicious spirits. And I don't mean scary in the way that Terl is supposed to be scary, but unstable scary. He did not look like someone one wanted to know. Other people in the office were kind of in awe about Travolta, but I just can't see it. I don't even think he's that great an actor. My one regret, given that the movie's finally coming out in an election year, is that I've misplaced the "Terl for President" buttons I got from the 1984 World Science Fiction con. Grr. _Deirdre
Again, then most of the science fiction stuff written is also Scientology related material, by that argument.
Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman are apparently out of scientology. At least, it's fairly apparent from her interviews over the last year that she is. They deflect questions about scientology that they hadn't in the past. _Deirdre
John Travolta as the star in a new hubbard-based novell - ok, everyone knew, that these are two important arms of Scientology.
:-) and leads the revolution against the heretics.
But Im surprised that Warner Studio is also "involved" - and noone can tell me, that the incredibly bad stories from hubbard would be brought to cinema by a independend, sane man or studio.
Basicly the short conclussion of the story sounds like the doctrine of scientology:
The Aliens "the heretic non-scientologists" control the world, a mighty "learning machine" open the eyes of the selected one (in fact scientology already charges impressive amounts of money for use of their "learning-maschines", which are more or less boxes of random electronic components, so I guess the selected one is the stupid who bids the most
Hey, I am not against some revolution here and then. But their way of revolution would make "the order of his eternal dark shadow" look like sunday afternoons teatime, so I better continue training at www.counter-strike.net for the last stand.
No smiley.
If you should happen to watch the film - it is their truth, in other words, best comparable to late nazi-propaganda where anglelike nazis save the world from bloodthirsty juds, baby-frying communists, anarchic family-structures and the tortour of free speech.
"Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair
I have gotten as far as 3/4 through Heinlein's "the cat who walks through walls" and dropped it. I have not to this day picked up another of his books. The same goes for Dean Koontz's "Dragon's Tears" .. It sucked, and it tainted my view of the authors.
Well I don't know about Heinlein, but as for a good Koontz book, try "Lightning", its a really cool book about time travel.
-- iCEBaLM
Hmmm...I have got to run with this...
He keeps writin' books even though he's dead,
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron
That's cause his cult went and froze his head
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron
Yeeaaaaaah, his brain is chilled!
Yeeeeeaaah, he's writing still!
And yeaaaah, he makes me ill...it's
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron.
Now they've got a movie by this Hubbard guy
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron
The folks at Slashdot don't think it will fly
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron
Yeeeeah, it's 'bout those pesky Psychlos!
Yeeeeah, John T.'s got two straws up his nose!
Yeeeah, it looks like this movie just blows...cause it's by
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron.
The star of this movie thinks that L. Ron is God
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron
But L. Ron's religion is just one giant fraud
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron
Yeeeah, folks're worried that this film will be
Yeeeah, recruiting more folks for Scientology
Yeeeah, all of us just have to wait and see...along with
L. Ron Ron Ron, L. Ron Ron
--WhiskeyJack
As much as many of us (often understandably) like to refer to as 'just another cult', there is a difference. Religions generally have open membership, low and strictly voluntary donations and are not generally secretive or exclusive as to who can or cannot join. Cults are usually centered around a still living or recently deceased charismatic figure, have very strict rules for membership, high 'donation' requirements and are generally very secretive (paranoid). Off-shoots from mainstream religions are not neccessarily cults either. The 'Jews for Jesus' are a sect of Judaism, while the 'Knights Templar' were (are?) a sect of Catholocism/Christianity. Tibetan Budhism, while centered around the charismatic figure of the Dalai Lama, still qualifies as a religion, because membership is open, donations are low and they are not very secretive. You could also say that the Dalai Lama represents the most recent human incarnation of 'God', much like Jesus represented God on Earth for Christians. The Tibetans just get a new one every 60 years or so, wheras the Christians are still waiting ;) The 'Catholic' kooks in Africa that killed themselves/each other are (were) a cult and not a sect. Borrowing names/terminology from other religions does not immediately qualify any old group-o-kooks as a sect. Keep those Grits-a-pourin' :) :) :) -kent
**>>BELCH
"Fact: Chemical properties are determined by the contents of the nucleus, the electron structure plays no role in this."
hello, did you NOT take chemistry?
why do you think water has all its weird little properties, and its polarity? hrm, that would be because of the location of the ELECTRONS.
why is carbon the basis of life? problably because it has 4 valence ELECTRONS which work like an organic tinker-toy!!!
and the list goes on and on!!!!
TCWWTW was one of the books written after he'd had a stroke and IMHO, none of the books he wrote after that were much fun. (Although, when SF is being studied in University, they will make great books for someone working on his PhD in Speculative Fiction full of self references as they are.)
For a better view of old Robbie, read "Starship Troopers" or "Glory Road". The latter is a great adult male fairly tale. The first is often misread as a paean to facism. I think that's not fair and a misreading. It is more about the responsibility a voting citizen should exercise, and anyway, it's just *speculative* fiction, i.e. "what if..." People often claim that this book suggested that the only way to get voting privileges was to join the military. Which is an exmple of how people can misread his books. The novel clearly states - on more than one occasion - that all that was required to gain a vote was "Public Service" such as military, fire department, forestry, amulance service, etc.
Which why old Rob often wrote, "I am amazed at how many people are unable to read simple, declarative sentences!" (Anyone who has worked a support desk wouldn't be surprised.)
Anyway, try some of his earlier books before you give up on him. He was occasionaly annoying but I still like to reread the earlier works from time to time.
Good point! It did save a lot of time though :)
- A.P.
--
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I really don't envy the man. Apparently he'd very much like out of the CoS, but he's such a cash-cow for them that they won't let him go without causing all sorts of trouble for the man, threatening family, whatever.
I feel for the man, but he made his bed, so he can lie in it and all that.
**>>BELCH
Way too much time on your hands pal.
I think the trailer looked very good and have heard good things about the book (especially before Scientology took off). Baring any bad reviews of the movie I'm going to see it because I don't discriminate on religion.
It's just that simple.
Warner Bros. distributes this, so be sure to cancel your cable and/or cablemodem if you get it from them. They own Turner which owns WCW, so cut out your pro wrestling. AOL owns them all, which isn't a problem for most of you except that AOL also owns Netscape, so stop using it now!
/really/ committed to your beliefs, strip naked and move into a cave!
If you're
--
#19845
Lessee, as a lifelong sf fan, I read this when it came out in paperback...and thought it didn't resemble much worth reading then, and it *certainly* wouldn't be a movie without the Scienterologists pushing it.
Hubbard wrote for the pulp mags. This is *literally* a series of stories, with the same characters, for each genre - Air Adventure Stories, Jungle Adventure Stories, Spy Adventure Stories, etc, ad nauseum. The could have made a (bad) tv series out of it.
When there are novels like, oh, Snow Crash, or the Uplift War, or Downbelow Station, etc, etc, etc, that are *worth* making a movie of, and instead they make this piece of crap....
*sigh*
I have heard it said that you can tell something about a culture by its cuisine. I have also heard it said that the US is known, around the world, for creating the world's best junk food.
Oh, and a note about Scientology: the one time I met John W. Campbell, in '67, at Worldcon in NYC, someone asked about Hubbard (not surprising, given that the hotel had overbooked, and had 3 *other* conventions at the same time...and one was Scientologists), and his reply was that Hubbard had told him that he (Hubbard) was tired of writing for a penny a word, and wanted to make real money...but from then on, he waffled between believing it, and figuring that it was just a scam.
Freedom of religion? Come *on*, the made it into a Church only after they'd been rejected by the IRS and, I think, the British equivalent, from their claim to be a non-profit organization.
mark "seen this for a *long* time...."
>If someone is pissing you off, and you want to return the compliment, then a very fine way to do so is to walk into one of the Church of
>Scientology's offices, take the free IQ test, and sound interested and enthusiastic. Chances are, you will be offered a personality test, also
>free of charge.
>
>Fill in the details of your adversary.
Oh you forgot the part about if he uses Linux, break into his house or apartment, reformat his hard drives & install W2K on his computer. But not if he uses one of the *BSDs -- those guys will track you down & beat the crap outta you for that.
Sheesh. What did your Dad ever do to you to deserve that kind of mistreatment?
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
A trick like this is kinda like the ever-lasting flame of a paper bag filled with shit that you leave on your enemy's doorstep. No matter what he/she does, it'll never go out. :) Lemme explain what I mean:
Living in Washington, DC, I sometimes pass by the CoS in Dupont Circle every once and a while. On nice days, a bunch of Scientologists often stand outside, giving away their free personality tests and beckoning people inside to watch their 'free movie.' A friend of mine actually did decide to see what its like 'on the other side,' and watchd the movie (which is pretty crappy, he said), and took the test. Yeah, he got the same 'creative type' prognosis and the junk mail. But the SCARY thing is that he has yet to be able to get OFF their list, even after moving three times!! Somehow, the mail has just followed him from place to place to place. He's called them to remove him, but no dice. Haven't talked to him in a few months, but he had signed up a few years ago.
Just a PSA. :)
Please buy a ticket for some deserving indie film or such that starts about the same time; then go see this B sci-fi movie. That way your ticket purchase means something.
/.'er would willingly support CoS even indirectly. Seeing as the CoS goons are not web-friendly and do not respect free speech. Hell you gotta wonder at a cult even the German government dislikes cause it reminds them of Nazism.
There is no way an informed
Reality is just a clever Hack, and the Planck constant is the refresh rate.
Someone earlier mentioned the terrible clip they showed on Leno a few days ago. I got to see it on the air (and it really must be SEEN to be believed), but the guys who run XenuTv.com also put it online. You can see it at http://209.241.48.234/us/battlefield.htm. If that's an inkling of what the rest of the movie is like... I think the new weather report in Hollywood will include "occasional showers of plummeting Warner Brothers executives from above." Oh yeah, did I mention that supposedly the movie in its current (and probably FINAL) form is 145 minutes long?
ARGH! That's it. Its a CoS plot: that submit button is too close to the preview. Damn body thetan messin' up my life again.
Just because a movie is backed by a certain community, or associated with a religion you disagree with, does not make the movie itself bad. The fact is, scientology was originally founded by L. Ron Hubbard's books. He was a science fiction author long before he was a spiritual prophet (or something of that nature), and a darn good one at that. The reality is, who doesn't have some sort of strange beliefs?? Even mainstream religions such as christianity and mormonism could be considered cults from the outside, and in most cases, are considered as such. If you don't agree with the religion, don't become a part of it, but since Battlefield Earth has nothing to do with scientology other than being backed by it, there is no reason not to watch it. Looks like it's gonna be one heck of a show as well
The chains are broken
Loki is free
Ragnarok is at hand...
is supposedly another famous scientologist.
Does that mean that next month we're going to start ragging
on Mission Impossible-2 as another cult indoctrination plot?
People, its a fscking movie! If you think theres gonna be a
hidden message, turn your bullshit filter to high before you
enter the theatre; or better yet, see something else!
I saw the clip that Travolta showed on The Tonight Show and unless he chose the worst scene in the whole movie to show, this movie looks like it's going to suck and suck big-time. As one memorable post on AICN said, Battlefield Earth looks like it could be the Howard The Duck of the year 2000. :) It kind of reminds me of The Postman in that it's a big star's pet project that just didn't turn out well. Of course it's not out yet so I could be wrong but from the clips I've seen and script reviews I've read, I'm not holding out much hope.
And about the size of the book, the movie is focusing on only the first half of the book. Plans are in the works to make the second half of the book if this one does well.
after all, the prices of movie tickets are more than enough to break the bank. Well, CoS, high ticket prices and bad reviews be damned, I love the book (read it about 4 times now) and as poorly as I'm sure it will translate into a screenplay I'll still go and watch it just on the off chance that it kicks as much ass as the book.
The chains are broken
Loki is free
Ragnarok is at hand...
Oh my gosh, I laughed my ass off reading this. I sang it for my office. Can I (or would you) send this to rec.humor.funny (aka www.netfunny.com)?
My
man are you cruel... :)
just go and run over his cat for g*d's sake allready... the effects are less permanent
Interesting....I've always found the way languages (mis)translate fascinating; that this little tidbit applies to a book that many here in the States hold as not only sacred but perfect in every way makes it doubly so. In any case, the "rope" version certainly makes more sense (though the camel version has inspired some truly awe inspiring sculptures in miniature[1]).
I stil stand by my initial point, though: the founding voice of the most prominent religion in this country is on the record stating that wealth is an impediment to spiritual enlightenment, possible mistranslation and various theological manuverings aside[2].
--WhiskeyJack
[1] The Ripley's Believe-It-Or-Not museum in San Fransisco had(has?) several miniature camel sculptures in ivory on display, all of a size to fit through a needle's eye. :)
[2] The debates in the middle ages surrounding whether the Church could morally possess wealth, forinstance. (In the end, it was concern over the Church's ability to maintain power that decided the issue, moreso than any theological arguments...they only needed to manuver just enough to justify it.)
The book has been put online. You can read it at http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/ cos/rmiller/index.html.
If more out-of-print books could be available on the web...
Glad you liked it...
You're more than welcome to freely distribute it. :)
-- WhiskeyJack
But what I really want to know is: the Scienos claim that Travolta is an OT Clear. (Operating Thetan Clear.) This means he is in touch with his Thetan nature (the spirits liberated when the evil being Xemu dropped a civiliation into volcanoes billions of years ago) and has powers of space and time, can heal with his touch, and fly through the air. So why doesn't he do his own stunts? And why is he so, well, chubby?
;)
same reason you sometimes have chubby doctors or especially dieticians/nutritionists
I feel sickened. If a book by Anton Le Vay was turned into a move by the Church of Satan, I would be willing to guess most of you would be up for that
;P ), and had no false pretenses about doing good for anybody but himself.
i have an open mind. open enough to know that Anton LeVay is openly evil (although some would say laughably so
Every day we're standing in a wind tunnel
Facing down the future coming fast - Rush
This sig intentionally left blank.
I did want to read Starship troopers, just to see where (if) the movie screwed things up. I'm glad to hear TCWWTW was a bomb, but I am not happy to hear why. That's rather sad to hear. I'll have to pick up something earlier.
Lowmag.net
the real problem is the whole ring thing. electrons are found in an area around the nucleus, not really a ring but more of a cloud around the nucleus.
Contact was OK, not nearly as good as the book of course, but not too butchered for a Hollywood film. Same with Sphere. Apart from that I can't think of any really. As an aside have you seen Cube? Now there is a truly intersting film.
I agree that Contact was okay. I was actully quite impressed with how little they mucked up the story. (It still was quite different from the book, but I think it got most of the important points across)
But Sphere? It's weird, the first time I read the book, I didn't like it. I tought the ending was... sucky, for lack of a better word. Years later (a couple of months before the movie was released), I decided to read it again, and then I realized that there are two interpretations of the ending - one sucky, one not. In fact, the alterntive interpretation was pretty cool, but harder to recognize. The movie's ending was very definitely based on the sucky interpretation of the ending, rather than the cool one. Too bad.
Okay, nobody has posted this yet, and I hate soudling like a total looney tune, but here goes:
FACTNet has posted some very serious concerns about the presence of actual subliminal messages in Battlefield Earth, aloing with information on others ways the Co$ is planning on making money/new recruits off this film.
Do yourself a favor and go read what they have to say.
I seriously doubt that everyone who goes to see this film will be instantly transformed into a Scientologist, but doesn't the idea that this is exactly what the Co$ is trying to do leave a bad taste in your mouth as well?
What does this button d$#%* NO CARRIER
Interestingly enough, Heinlein groupies in the 70's wanted to form a cult around Stranger in a Strange Land (for obvious reasons) but according to Grumbles from the Grave (Heinlein's collected, post-mortem correspondence) he just would go along with it.
Oh! Does everyone remember the pitched battles between the Scientologists and the Fundamentalists in Friday?
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
Sorry, I guess I'm just worn out and ready to go home...
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
From your description, it's obvious he is still infested with body Thetans. He's not clear. He'll have to pay for it all, all over again.
What a pity.
Calling for a boycott, or telling people "don't spend your money on this movie" is not an oppression of speech. Making a movie is "free speech" and telling people to see or not to see it is also "free speech".
So most of us think Scientology is a load of horse poopie. We like ranting about how they take people's money. We're not against free speech.
Think before you post smart guy.
Derek"Don't tell me about the answer because another one will come along soon" - Bad Religion
No reasonable slashdotter could consider the above comment to be Flamebait. This post was moderated down for reasons of personal bias, plain and simple.
Since the poster both A: labeled scientology a "sci-fi cult/religion" and B: said that Hubbard was "okay in (his) book" and praised his writing, it is difficult to say whether he was moderated down by A: a Scientologist, who felt morally obligated to censor to the best of his ability anything non-adulatory written about the late Big Guy, or B: by an equally closed-minded anti-Scientologist, who felt that in the eternal battle against the evil brainwashing Xenu-huggers there are no neutrals, and that anyone who broaches any related subject without rigorously excoriating the CoS is providing aid and comfort to the enemy, and may and should be silenced by whatever means are necessary.
In either case, it is a thoroughly Microsoft attitude, and it disgusts me.
Roughly 10 years ago I went to a library to pick up a sci fi book to read. I found the Mission Earth series and I liked the 1st book so much that I bought the entire dekalogy in hardback soon afterwards (please spare me the flames, I'm aware that many scifi fans think that Hubbard put the aAck! in Hack). I wish I would have bought them through a Waldenbooks store instead of bridge publications (the address I got from the book cover). At the time I didn't know jack about scientology, dianetics, etc ad nauseum. Just thought it was a bunch of selfhelp hoo-haa amongst other "Improve Yourself! Get Rich Quick!" scams of the day. Soon after I became aware of what the scientologists were about (during the early 90's start of censorship wars about their "sacred texts" being trashed online) I became very careful not to give them my business again. To make matters worse, I've been on every damn mailing list the scientologists put out because I ordered through Bridge publications, a front group for them. Ironic that this subject came up now...I just got in the mail a poster advertisement for this movie. John Travolta can go SHOCK himself if he thinks I'm going to see this wacko propaganda hack.
'course this is totally unverified, and may be a pile of hooey...
IANAEAGH (I am not an etymological and geographic historian), but I'd guess it's a pile of hooey. I've heard this explanation before, with the difference being that it was a very low gate which required a camel, never a graceful beast, to get down on its knees and shuffle through. The implication being, of course, that it is difficult and maybe uncomfortable, but possible for someone who makes the effort.
It's an amusing image, too. Rather more amusing than imagining the well-fed rich guy who first made it up ad-libbing it to the ragged and hungry poor who had the gall to reproach him.
When they made Dune into a movie, they compressed 500 pages of mostly history/scenesetting type stuff into 15 seconds of footage.
_____
_____
The antidote to bad speech is not censorship, but more speech.
You presume well.
I don't want to start a religious fight or anything, but to explain the Christian perspective for a moment, Christians believe that those things will be fulfilled at Christ's second coming.
No religious fight taken ;-) I hope I don't insult any of your beliefs along the way.
It's that whole second coming bit that is the problem with Jesus in the eyes of Jews. There's no mention of such a thing in the various messianic writings by the Hebrew prophets.
Furthermore, the idea that the messiah would himself/herself be divine is foreign to Jews. Several people have been proclaimed (or have proclaimed themselves) the Jewish Messiah. Bar Kochba and Shabatai Zvi are probably the two most famous. In both cases, they were just men and never claimed otherwise (and neither did their followers).
As a complete aside, the idea of the Jewish God having some divine company wasn't introduced by Christianity. There was a heretical stream of Jewish thought about 2 1/2 thousand years ago which sucked in Asherah/Asarte/Ishtar (of "Snow Crash" fame) from the Babelonians and made her the "Consort" of the Jewish God. It hasn't survived, but the "Shechinah" (which seems to have a similar root word as "Asherah"), is sort of like the "feminine" aspect of God. But it's not considered a different personality or anything, like the Holy Spirit.
But seriously, about that sect distinction with Jews for Jesus. If you think about it, Christianity itself is a sect of Judaism, albeit one that "real" Jews would consider heretical. (Like how "real" Christians consider Mormons and Jehovah's witnesses)
At one point (say, around the year 100 AD), that was certainly true. But over time, Christian doctrine and theology have strayed very far from Jewish ways. The term "Judeo-Christian ethics" bugs me, because most of the time it either refers to explictly Christian ideas or ideas that are universal to all reasonably civilized people.
I don't think the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses have moved quite as far from Christianity as Christianity has moved from Judiasm. I'd certainly consider them Christian sects. Trying to put Jesus into Judiasm today is not creating a sect; it's moving to an entirely different religion.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
To be fair, the line "if I don't make it as a writer - I'm going to start my own religion." does sound as though it could have been spoken in jest. I can't remember ever reading anything else about Scientology that was funny instead of frightening though.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Along these lines, here's something that bugged me about everyone's favorite movie-length music video, the Matrix - why use the battery/energy-source explanation for keeping humans around when laying on the table is a better explanation - using humans as nodes in a distributed computing net? And maybe a half-assed gesture to obeying Asimov's laws of robotics - farming humans isn't hurting humans (hehehehe). And that's not even starting in on the silliness that the AIs have to follow the physical laws inside the Matrix at all.
I guess my point is that for most people, bad science doesn't affect their impression of a movie. In Star Wars or B-Star Galactica, didn't the cool doppler-shifting whine of the fighters sweeping past give you goosebumps? Alien had it right - in space not only can no one hear you scream, no one hears anything!
Decisions, decisions...
So whadda ya say, kids, thrill ride or funhouse?
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
I dunno, it only seems to get in way when moving people from DOS to Linux.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
This movie probably won't have a lot of Scientology, if any, in it. The books were mostly a sci-fi series that had nothing to do with L. Ron's little joke cult. People's urge to boycott the movie is not a matter of censorship, but one of consumers voting with their wallet. When you buy a ticket to this movie, you are giving money to Scientology (the cult is one of the financers of the movie). THAT is the problem. I have no idea if the movie will be enjoyable or not, but that's not the issue. The issue is that I will not give my money to Scientology.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Well, that's terribly ironic, since in Scientology homosexuality is a biiiiiiig no-no. Of course, there are rumors that Scientology is blackmailing the guy with stories of past homosexual dalliances, but I don't know if it's true. I personally wouldn't care if he had fooled around with some guy, but I would object to the blackmailing, if it were the case.
--
--
Do I look like I speak for my employer?
Ew, you started Heinlein with "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls"? That was one of the ones written after he got totally and completely stupid. Try "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" if you ever decide to give him another go; I won't say it's not stupid, but at the very least it's stupid in an amusing way.
--
"HORSE."
"HORSE."
-Flaming Carrot
That said, the xenu.net "heckler" website is a bit more balanced than you give it credit for (of course, it is fundamentally anti-CoS, but it does try to avoid some of the most hysterical stuff), and it does link to www.scientology.org. Albeit way down the page, and amidst a forest of critical links, so don't give it that much credit. Some of the other "heckler" sites are a little more uncritically critical -- if that makes any sense. :)
--
--
Do I look like I speak for my employer?
And in any case, it's certainly not fair to say "there isn't really very much hope for" your respondent - it just means they haven't advanced beyond high-school chem. No reason to disparage someone for that.
--
--
Do I look like I speak for my employer?
Movie companies should have a site called something like movies.com where they put all their movies? (or just let people use imdb, which has links to movie homepage, IIRC)
#define X(x,y) x##y
#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes ,
They should have made a Mission Earth movie(s)....
Yaaah!!
A "Mission: Earth" movie would be like, what? 26 hours long???
Jay (=
(Glad to know he's not the only non-Scientologist who read that serise, though.)
>And I have no respect at all for that 'yosemite' >fellow who's posting anti-Scieno :)
> messages on this Slashdot topic. I'd >suspect him of being a plant to discredit the >anti-Scienos, if I thought
> Scientology were capable of being >that subtle.
I dont know how much more obvious I can make my message. First off Lets not get in the business of
"He's a plant" Whatever. In the end it will simply discredit you. "Hmm...if he says yosemite is a plant..well then maybe he is a plant trying to discredit yosemite" Lets stick to the facts..How do you define evil...other end of the spectrum from good..logic...the antichrist represents evil AND the destruction of all things good...logic..if he tried to father the antichrist...then it would do well to say l ron is EVIL! Let me make this clear
These are reasons I have come upon from PERSONAL EXPERIENCE From my point of view it is only too clear.. lron hubbard is a dog fucking satanist...no actually most satanists are nice people...He is an egomaniac...yes evan a virus. It seems his power is greater in death then it was in his life. That is a very sickening thought
Many years ago, when I was reading everything and anything that was science fiction, a friend lent this to me as a joke. It has the spectacular awfulness of a Harold Robbins novel, without that man's storytelling ability. I plowed my way through the series, enjoying the unintentional humour and reciting passages to friends with a malicious glee. This was one bad book, rivalling even some of the worst slash'n'screw swords & sorcery fantasy novels, which is saying something.
Urrk.
Ever read Ayn Rand? it sounds like you do:
;)
:P
Socialists do the same thing. Punitive taxes are "progressive", while fair taxes are "regressive". Etc, etc. I'm sure many other groups do the same, but I don't dislike them enough to have references handy
Really, I don't know what your talking about, there are clearnly defined terms for 'progressive' and 'regressive' taxes. A progressive tax takes a higher persentage of higher income people, such as income tax, and a regressive tax takes more from people with less income, such as a sales tax.
a flat tax is nither progressive or regressive.
And as far as china goes, there is no 'People's democratic republic'. What we call China calles itself the Peoples Republic of China, and what we call Taiwan calls itself the Democratic Republic of China. Both are acurite terms to define the contries.
gah, not spellcheckd, don't care
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Chemically, a H- ion has more in common with a He atom than a neutral H atom
So *that's* why I have this di-helium oxide compound! And helium fluoride. And...ad nauseum.
I have to say, you are wrong on that call.
H- ions do NOT have the same chemical properties as He atoms. The reason being that the charge makes them want to create ionic bonds with positively charged ions, as opposed to Helium, which has no charge.
"Don't mind me cutting myself on Occam's Razor"
duan ying review zai zher. Click here
It's written by an anti-scientology person, but its pretty entertaining.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Anyway, I don't know of any good SF book that made a great movie in the last 20 years...(except the Matrix ;-)
The Matrix was an origional peice, it was never a book.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
makes much more sense now :P
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
I was about to continue this discussion, until I realised I was beating a dead horse in my original post, and now I don't know what I am doing to this poor rotting corpse now, only that it feels *really* illegal.
Of course, since I like feeling illegal, I will continue.
You are right that H generally forms ionic bonds. Of course, *in* *any *case*, H generally forms the H+ ion, so, according to your precendent, I can ignore the whole H- ion stuff you are talking about.
If H- ion is the *result* of an ionic bond, then an ionic compound has been formed, so you are looking at an artificial ion *anyways*. And since H- ion is part of a ionic compound (key word here is *compound*), you can't look at it as a seperate entity.
An H- ion *does* want to create an ionic bond. The charge attracts a positive ion, and a ionic compound is formed do to this. Unless the H- ion is already part of an ionic compound. AFAIK, H- are not a natural occurance, and nor do you have free floating H- ions that are NOT part of a ionic compound or solutions.
Of course, I am pretty sure we have crossed the border from science into semantics several paragraphs ago, and all we need to do is to drag in a guest appearance by everybody's favorite mustached fascist to complete this arguement
Going to bed, I hope you are too.
"Don't mind me cutting myself on Occam's Razor"
But yes, he was an egomaniac, and he certainly seems to have suffered from rather extreme paranoid delusions. Perhaps even "evil", though I would personally tend to reserve such a word for people more able to make moral choices.
But I will say this: your extreme emotionalism isn't going to impress anyone who isn't already a die-hard anti-Scieno. It's so clearly a non-rational reaction. Heck, to a Scientologist, your behavior would probably confirm everything they've been taught about Suppressive Persons. But hey, First Amendment, you can say what you like however you like (more or less).
--
--
Do I look like I speak for my employer?
Maybe they are not those kind of messages...maybe they are more subtle..designed to evoke a emotion or a state of mind...
Let me say it again...He tried to father the antichrist...In my book that is far worse then fucking a dog..
What does that say about CoS when their biggest stars..er i mean followers like travolta are reputed to be gay?
In this you speak the truth..I may be violent in my opinions and use caps and lots of !!!'s but that is just how I express things...I really do feal that strongly about this subject...He IS an evil man...
My two dogfucking cents...
When two organisations working against citizens (either by trying to steal my rights or by religious fanatism) team up I don't give a shit whether the movie is good or bad, they still can put it up their ass.
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
They supposiedly shut down that branch of CoS a while back...believe what you want about that.
Ph, and that wacky stuff out there is 100% real...there are people with ruined lifes because they spread it. If it was lies, the Church couldn't have sued.
Also, they engage in various cult like behaviors...I forget the code word, but they can simply declare someone 'doesn't exist', and church members are not supported to associate with them. And, of course, they don't tell you the whole religion at once, but start out one way, and get wackier and wackier...frankly, I don't trust any religion that doesn't tell you the full story up front.
They are most definately not friends of the free speech in general, and the internet in paticular. And, yes, they spend an insanely large amount of the money they make on lawsuits.
I just feel that any religion that claim 'religious truths' are trade secrets just admitted they aren't a religion at all. And, in reply to what I know is coming...yes, the Catholic Church acted much the same way...but, duh, it wasn't acting like a religion at that point either.
Of course, I have no URLs, but just search on the word.
-David T. C.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?