Re: DARPA Seeking Solicitations on Big Brother Project

On Thursday 22 May 2003 9:05 pm, Navindra Umanee wrote:
> Daniel Cassidy <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yes. I think.
>
> Ha, so you *haven't* seen it.  You're just being snobbish on
> principle.  :-)
>
> > This is of course the only way the thoroughly broken plot in the
> > original could possibly be fixed. And it's all ripped straight out
>
> Maybe you are guilty of making more assumptions than you should have
> in the original?
>
> Of course a certain suspense of belief is *required* if you're not
> going to puke at such concepts as human being == duracell battery,
> although it was certainly an entertaining visual.
>
> And btw, it's the same with your beloved Terry Prachett.  On the one
> hand he is building a new Universe with new ridiculous rules and on
> the other hand he is *counting* on you to make comparisons with your
> own world.  Yet if you insist on goign too far with your comparison,
> you'll soon give up on Prachett altogether.  That's how it is with
> Sci-Fi.

Well, Pratchett writes humourous fantasy which is deliberately absurd. Similar 
to Douglas Adams, who is one of my favourite authors. However The Matrix 
attempts to be serious, philosophical science fiction and falls down 
completely because if you actually pay attention to what's going on, you find 
a distinct lack of structure. If this is deliberate, then it is perhaps too 
subtle. And I'm very fond of studying the subtleties of literature.

> > of far better Gibson novels, amongst other souces. Not to mention
> > the curious similarity to Ghost in the Shell, which also has a far
> > better plot.
> >
> > Real Sci-fi is the likes of Minority Report. Read some of Philip
> > Dick's novels too.
>
> I've seen the Minority Report movie (not read it), and there was
> *nothing* particularly *remarkable* about it.  It's all been done
> before and I've heard it all before.  Though of course, I may have
> read the book in my younger days...

At the time it was written, it was pretty original. Of course, original plots 
have been reused and thoroughly broken by Hollywood time and time again, by 
the likes of The Matrix, so that when people come across the original, 
coherent work they react a lot like you did. Not that the Minority Report 
movie isn't guilty of the odd piece of silliness, but it suffers less than 
The Matrix, which seems like a patchwork of odd bits of ideas from various 
sources that would otherwise have been very effective, except that they've 
been cut up and not stitched together properly.

> I liked Solaris though and thought it was a good example of Sci-Fi
> that the general populace absolutely hated.  That's why I can forgive
> the Matrix for appealing to the masses while at the same time having
> an underlying plot that most people can't really follow at all.

I'm not sure if you're accusing me of being a member of that latter group or 
not. Believe me, I have no troubles following it. I just don't think it's 
well crafted.

> Re Gibson: When I was younger I started reading Necromancer and
> stopped half-way.  I thought it was horribly stupid but maybe now I'll
> give it another try.

Had you finished it then on seeing The Matrix you might have written:
I've seen The Matrix, and there was *nothing* particularly *remarkable* about 
it.  It's all been done before and I've heard it all before. 

-- 
dan

"Were i susceptible to having my mind changed, it would have changed my mind" 
- Matthew Parris

Kde-cafe mailing list - [email protected]
http://ofb.biz/lists/listinfo.cgi/kde-cafe

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal
opinions of the author and do not represent OfB.biz: Open for Business, KDE or the author's employer.