Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ames-lm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!bmcg!cepu!trwrba!trwrb!sdcrdcf!hplabs!ames-lm!barry
From: barry@ames-lm.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: Arthur C. Clarke's 2010
Message-ID: <226@ames-lm.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-May-84 16:01:36 EDT
Article-I.D.: ames-lm.226
Posted: Fri May  4 16:01:36 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 6-May-84 07:41:01 EDT
References: <322@astrovax.UUCP>, <324@astrovax.UUCP>
Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Mtn. View, CA
Lines: 41

[]
>I also recall that Hyams was responsible for OUTLAND, the Connery vehicle
>which concerned mining operations on Io (ha!). Not only was the film a
>blatant copy of HIGH NOON and ALIEN (at least in its set design), it was also
>one of the more scientifically ignorant science fiction films that I have
>seen. For example, no one could forget the amazing exploding miners who seemed
>to blow up the very instant they were exposed to vacuum and the ludicrous
>idea of an underground mining operation on Io, which has so much volcanic
>activity that it resurfaces itself on the order of every million years or so
>(for those who don't recall, Io is the innermost large moon of Jupiter).
>I find his selection as director for 2010 most amusing since he so thoroughly
>botched scientific details covered competently in 2001 (humans in a vacuum
>without spacesuits; see also Clarke's EARTHLIGHT) and vital to 2010 (screwing
>up descriptions of the Jovian moons). Good luck, Arthur; you're going to
>need it with this guy!

        While I share your opinion of OUTLAND, I must, in fairness,
correct some misimpressions you have. First, OUTLAND cannot be a "blatant
copy" of ALIEN, since it was released *before* ALIEN. Second, the Voyager
missions to Jupiter did not arrive there until after OUTLAND was made, and
your information about Io, while correct, was known to no one at the time.
        Finally, a minor point. Even if 2001 was accurate in suggesting
that an unprotected human can survive a vacuum for a minute or so (it
sounds right to me, but I'm not an authority, nor is Clarke), it was
still a work of fiction, and should not be considered the Gospel of space
travel without supporting evidence. Science and science fiction are two
different things.
        Which brings to mind an amusing anecdote that Isaac Asimov has
told about 2001. Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics" were accepted as
standard in science fiction long before 2001 opened. He relates that,
when he first saw the film, he became very upset when HAL did in the
Discovery's crew, and left the theater muttering "they violated the
Three Laws; they VIOLATED the THREE LAWS!". Whereupon a friend said to
him, "Well, why don't you just strike them down with lightning, Isaac?"
                                        Regards,

                                                Kenn Barry
                                                NASA-Ames Research Center
                                                Moffett Field, CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Electric Avenue:      {dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames-lm!barry