Text 16492, 51 rader
Skriven 2007-08-01 13:19:52 av Josh Hill (2965.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
============================================
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 08:30:50 -0700, Bill <feline_ranger@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>By that logic, we should never have heard explosions in space from B5
>either. But there is a hypothetical basis for sound in space mentioned
>in one of JMS's episode commentaries. But, yeah, you're right that
>drama trumps all. Roddenberry had a basis for ST's engine sounds, too.
>He wrote a book called "The Making of Star Trek" and explained in
>there that the Enterprise was based loosely on an aircraft carrier. In
>his experiences in the Navy serving on a carrier, he noticed that the
>engine hum was always there so he tried to recreate that on ST.

Heh, most of what I know about Star Trek comes from that book, which I
read as raptly as a miserable case of dysentery permitted when I was
15 or so and flying back from Mexico with a friend on his father's
company plane. Guess those particular neurons didn't survive the
sixties . . .

>Since I'm a big Doctor Who fan as well (at least pretend you're
>surprised ;) ), I happen to disagree with you about the TARDIS wheeze.
>The TARDIS owes more to H .G. Wells than to popular understanding of
>Einsteinian concepts so all bets are off on what it would sound like.
>The wheeze has been around long enough now that the sound elicits some
>of the same reactions as "It was the year of fire ... " If nothing
>else, the wheeze is very distinctive. Okay, drama trumps all again.
>But I like the time-traveling port-a-pottie :D

It has a curiously living quality, too, doesn't it? Which is what made
the Star Wars sounds so marvelous. But it seems to me campy nostalgia
at this point, like the Daleks or the console of the TARDIS itself --
not out of keeping with the show's quirky British humor, but not,
well, very convincing, in the sense of subjective plausibility.

Which reminds me of a pet peeve: why do shows set in the future
usually contain design elements that are firmly rooted in the present?
Those NYC skyscrapers in TLT could have been in the rebuilding plans
for Ground Zero. The architecture and fashions of 2300 will presumably
be as different from ours as the architecture and fashions of 1700.
I'm reminded of the story, IIRC from the Making of Star Trek, of how
the gardener kept bringing Rodenberry tropical plants when he wanted
alien-looking ones. Seems he got so frustrated that he pulled one of
the plants out of its pot and set it upside down, roots in the air.

-- 
Josh

"Your manuscript is both good and original. But the part that is
good is not original, and the part that is original is not good."
	-- Samuel Johnson
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)