• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

BBC's War of the Worlds

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by BR14 View Post
    did you get your blue peter badge?
    well, if you consider a grade 1 in French O level so, then yes!

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
      as are the Time Machine and the Invisible Man, no doubt, although I haven't actually read any of them.
      So your opinion is worthless then. FTAOD I've read the entire Wells canon over the years...

      My English Lit teacher preferred a Tale of Two Cities and Robinson Crusoe! I did read large parts of the Count of Monte Cristo in French though!
      So? I read those, plus a lot more Dickens, plus Shakespeare, Chaucer, and several 20th Century ones: the one benefit of attending three separate secondary schools I suppose. Still doesn't support your argument.

      I had to read the book of 2001 a Space Odyssey to work out what was happening in the film!
      So now you know how and why to convert a perfectly reflecting surface into a light-absorbing black one... (hint: I've read a large amount of the Clarke's work as well)
      Blog? What blog...?

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by malvolio View Post
        So your opinion is worthless then. FTAOD I've read the entire Wells canon over the years...



        So? I read those, plus a lot more Dickens, plus Shakespeare, Chaucer, and several 20th Century ones: the one benefit of attending three separate secondary schools I suppose. Still doesn't support your argument.


        So now you know how and why to convert a perfectly reflecting surface into a light-absorbing black one... (hint: I've read a large amount of the Clarke's work as well)
        So your opinion is worthless then
        It wasn't my opinion and I was just repeating what the pundits had said. Perhaps I should have been more specific with my statement.

        Still doesn't support your argument.
        and what argument was that? I just related that I'd read these. I hated English literature and have read very few fiction books and almost all because I was obliged to. I was also forced to read Shakespeare and I remember very little about any of what I read. I was also obliged to read large parts of the Count of Monte Cristo in French as part of my O level French course. I've only read two books by choice. One was the recollections of the violin player in the Auschwitz orchestra and the other was the Ascent of Man by Bronowski. I remember very little of either.

        So now you know how and why to convert a perfectly reflecting surface into a light-absorbing black one
        ah, no. I only read up to the point that I understood what was going on with the black monoliths.

        In contrast, I have read many technical instruction manuals on various mechanical devices including how to cut a thread on a lathe, which is a very demanding task and only possible with the appropriate fittings. Reading an ex RAF officer's training manual on how to fly a plane was also very informative.

        If you hand me a car or motor bike completely dismantled which has no electronic devices, I dare say I could substantially reconstruct it eventually with minimal references to any manual.

        So, it's horses for courses. A fish is a good swimmer, whilst other beings might not be, but a bird is a good flier, while most fish aren't.

        Comment


          #14
          The good Lord preserve me from Philistines....

          Had you read the "The Sentinel"*, not only would you have understood the film immediately, you would have recognised the reason given in the book about the film for chnging Clarke's refelctive monolith to a black one. Something to do with not wanting to film the crew and spoiling the illusion.




          *Which, just to be clear, is the Arthur C Clarke short story that forms the whole basis of the film, that a signal is sent as soon as the human race (or any other race) reaches the point where they can travel off their own planet. All that metaphysical stuff at the end is merely showing off.
          Blog? What blog...?

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
            I had to read the book of 2001 a Space Odyssey to work out what was happening in the film!
            That must have been slightly confusing since Discovery went to Saturn in the book and Jupiter in the film.

            TMA2 was on Iapetus in the book and orbiting Jupiter in the film.



            I well remember when 2001 was shown again in the 80s, wandering out of the Odeon in Swansea laughing quietly to myself at all the other punters who seemed confused & disappointed that it wasn't at all like Star Wars.
            When the fun stops, STOP.

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by malvolio View Post
              The good Lord preserve me from Philistines....

              Had you read the "The Sentinel"*, not only would you have understood the film immediately, you would have recognised the reason given in the book about the film for chnging Clarke's refelctive monolith to a black one. Something to do with not wanting to film the crew and spoiling the illusion.




              *Which, just to be clear, is the Arthur C Clarke short story that forms the whole basis of the film, that a signal is sent as soon as the human race (or any other race) reaches the point where they can travel off their own planet. All that metaphysical stuff at the end is merely showing off.
              would you have understood the film immediately
              as I said, I watched the film first, the first part of which, without dialogue, wasn't easy to understand. I watch films to be entertained and the occasional revelation such as the end of the original Planet of the Apes. The BBC's version of the War of the Worlds wasn't easy to follow because of the switching to the future. If I remember correctly, the Martians succumbed to bacteria in a relatively short time, which wasn't portrayed in the BBC offering.

              What irritates me is when film makers claim that their version of a film is a true reflection of a novel and then you have a helicopter in Where Eagles Dare and a steam locomotive built in the 1950's in Robert Powell's version of the 39 Steps, let alone a 1950's Triumph Thunderbird (or T110) being used to jump the fence in the Great Escape.

              Comment


                #17
                For those inerrested Steven Baxter (who happens to be the current president of the HG Wells Society) has written a sequel to WotW, 'The massacre of Mankind', good in places with a very 21st Century take (still in period story line) as the main protagonist is Female.

                Comment


                  #18
                  To be fair it’s much better than “the Irishman” that’s 3 hours I won’t get back


                  Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

                  Comment


                    #19
                    So your opinion is worthless then. FTAOD I've read the entire Wells canon over the years...
                    So? I read those, plus a lot more Dickens, plus Shakespeare, Chaucer, and several 20th Century ones: the one benefit of attending three separate secondary schools I suppose. Still doesn't support your argument
                    The good Lord preserve me from Philistines....

                    Had you read the "The Sentinel"*, not only would you have understood the film immediately, you would have recognised the reason given in the book about the film for chnging Clarke's refelctive monolith to a black one. Something to do with not wanting to film the crew and spoiling the illusion.

                    *Which, just to be clear, is the Arthur C Clarke short story that forms the whole basis of the film, that a signal is sent as soon as the human race (or any other race) reaches the point where they can travel off their own planet. All that metaphysical stuff at the end is merely showing off.
                    Ooooh sir! Me sir! I know sir! Please sir!

                    Speaking of merely showing off, have you any idea how ridiculously pompous and self inflated you sound?

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Originally posted by Snooky View Post
                      Ooooh sir! Me sir! I know sir! Please sir!

                      Speaking of merely showing off, have you any idea how ridiculously pompous and self inflated you sound?
                      Given the poster's handle, and where he resides I don't think this is in any doubt whatsoever - BTW Twelfth Night is my favourite of Will's comedies.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X